MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989672233 · doi:10.1038/s41562-019-0772-6

A consensus-based transparency checklist

2019· article· en· W2989672233 on OpenAlexafffund
Balázs Aczél, Barnabás Szászi, Alexandra Sarafoglou, Zoltán Kekecs, Šimon Kucharský, Daniel J. Benjamin, Chris Chambers, Agneta Fisher, Andrew Gelman, Morton Ann Gernsbacher, John P. A. Ioannidis, Eric J. Johnson, Kai J. Jonas, Stavroula Kousta, Scott O. Lilienfeld, D. Stephen Lindsay, Candice C. Morey, Marcus R. Munafò, Ben R. Newell, Harold Pashler, David R. Shanks, Daniel J. Simons, Jelte M. Wicherts, Dolores Albarracín, Nicole D. Anderson, John Antonakis, Hal R. Arkes, Mitja D. Back, George C. Banks, Christopher G. Beevers, Andrew Bennett, Wiebke Bleidorn, Ty W. Boyer, Cristina Cacciari, Alice S. Carter, Joseph Cesario, Charles Clifton, Ronán Conroy, M. E. Cortese, Fiammetta Cosci, Nelson Cowan, Jarret T. Crawford, Eveline A. Crone, John J. Curtin, Randall W Engle, Simon Farrell, Pasco Fearon, Mark Fichman, Willem E. Frankenhuis, Alexandra M. Freund, M. Gareth Gaskell, Roger Giner‐Sorolla, Don P. Green, Robert L. Greene, Lisa L. Harlow, Fernando Hoces de la Guardia, Derek M. Isaacowitz, Janet L. Kolodner, Debra Lieberman, Gordon D. Logan, Wendy Berry Mendes, Lea Moersdorf, Brendan Nyhan, Jeffrey M. Pollack, Christopher J. Sullivan, Simine Vazire, Eric‐Jan Wagenmakers

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Human Behaviour · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of California, San FranciscoCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityUniversiteit van TilburgUniversité de LausanneNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekRotman Research Institute, BaycrestUniversiteit MaastrichtEötvös Loránd TudományegyetemUniversiteit van AmsterdamCurtin University of TechnologyUniversity of California, San DiegoUniversity of New South WalesUniversiteit LeidenUniversity of BristolCardiff UniversityMedical Research CouncilOld Dominion UniversityUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignMichigan State UniversityUniversity of Nebraska OmahaUniversity of CincinnatiUniversity of MiamiUniversity of MissouriUniversità degli Studi di FirenzeUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonGeorgia Institute of TechnologyUniversität ZürichCarnegie Mellon UniversityRoyal College of Surgeons in IrelandNorth Carolina State UniversityVanderbilt UniversityRadboud UniversiteitOhio State UniversityGeorgia Southern UniversityUniversity of Southern CaliforniaUniversity College LondonCase Western Reserve UniversityWestfälische Wilhelms-Universität MünsterEmory UniversityBoston College
KeywordsChecklistTransparency (behavior)Computer sciencePsychologyData scienceWorld Wide WebInternet privacyInformation retrievalComputer securityCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a consensus-based checklist to improve and document the transparency of research reports in social and behavioural research. An accompanying online application allows users to complete the form and generate a report that they can submit with their manuscript or post to a public repository.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.448
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.680
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.552
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4480.680
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.009
Bibliometrics0.0220.011
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0080.013
Research integrity0.0070.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.005

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.505
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.015 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReproducibility
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations172
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature Human BehaviourSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207