Deficiencies in methods reporting in animal experimentation lead to difficulties in reproducing experiments; the authors propose a set of reporting standards to improve scientific communication and study design. The US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke convened major stakeholders in June 2012 to discuss how to improve the methodological reporting of animal studies in grant applications and publications. The main workshop recommendation is that at a minimum studies should report on sample-size estimation, whether and how animals were randomized, whether investigators were blind to the treatment, and the handling of data. We recognize that achieving a meaningful improvement in the quality of reporting will require a concerted effort by investigators, reviewers, funding agencies and journal editors. Requiring better reporting of animal studies will raise awareness of the importance of rigorous study design to accelerate scientific progress.

Irreproducibility of preclinical biomedical research has gained recent attention. It is suggested that requiring authors to complete a checklist at the time of manuscript submission would improve the quality and transparency of scientific reporting, and ultimately enhance reproducibility. Whether a checklist enhances quality and transparency in reporting preclinical animal studies, however, has not been empirically studied. Here we searched two highly cited life science journals, one that requires a checklist at submission (Nature) and one that does not (Cell), to identify in vivo animal studies. After screening 943 articles, a total of 80 articles were identified in 2013 (pre-checklist) and 2015 (post-checklist), and included for the detailed evaluation of reporting methodological and analytical information. We compared the quality of reporting preclinical animal studies between the two journals, accounting for differences between journals and changes over time in reporting. We find that reporting of randomization, blinding, and sample-size estimation significantly improved when comparing Nature to Cell from 2013 to 2015, likely due to implementation of a checklist. Specifically, improvement in reporting of the three methodological information was at least three times greater when a mandatory checklist was implemented than when it was not. Reporting the sex of animals and the number of independent experiments performed also improved from 2013 to 2015, likely from factors not related to a checklist. Our study demonstrates that completing a checklist at manuscript submission is associated with improved reporting of key methodological information in preclinical animal studies.

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.

Data Carpentry for Biologists is a set of teaching materials for teaching biologists how to work with data through programming, database management and computing more generally.

This repository contains the complete teaching materials (excluding exams and answers to assignments) and website for a university style and self-guided course teaching computational data skills to biologists. The course is designed to work primarily as a flipped classroom, with students reading and viewing videos before coming to class and then spending the bulk of class time working on exercises with the teacher answering questions and demoing the concepts.

More information can be found on the project's GitHub page: https://github.com/datacarpentry/semester-biology/tree/v4.1.0

Improving the reliability and efficiency of scientific research will increase the credibility of the published scientific literature and accelerate discovery. Here we argue for the adoption of measures to optimize key elements of the scientific process: methods, reporting and dissemination, reproducibility, evaluation and incentives. There is some evidence from both simulations and empirical studies supporting the likely effectiveness of these measures, but their broad adoption by researchers, institutions, funders and journals will require iterative evaluation and improvement. We discuss the goals of these measures, and how they can be implemented, in the hope that this will facilitate action toward improving the transparency, reproducibility and efficiency of scientific research.

A free, brief textbook to introduce students to the core concepts of empirical social science research methods, available in PDF (main download link below) and EPUB (additional file below). This textbook has been used as the main textbook in an undergraduate social science research methods course (supplemented by many in-class exercises and research reports) and as the basis of a review in preparation for graduate-level study in research methods and program evaluation.

Contents: (1) Identifying the research question (and an aside about theory); (2) Conceptualizing and operationalizing (and sometimes hypothesizing); (3) Data collection structured by formal research designs; (3.1) Sampling; (3.2) Data collection methods; (3.3) Formal research designs; (4) Data analysis; (5) Generalizing and theorizing; (6) Evaluating research: Validity and reliability; (7) Research ethics; (8) Appendix A: More research designs; (9) Appendix B: Elaboration modeling; (10) Appendix C: Research Methods Glossary.

A note to instructors: If you use this text in any way, whether as the primary text, a supplemental text, or a recommended resource, I ask only two small favors: (1) When you make it available to students, please always include a link back to the text’s download site, https://scholar.utc.edu/oer/1/. While you are free to download and distribute the text intact under the Creative Commons 4.0 license, my preference is that you point students to this website to download it themselves. Seeing the download numbers tick up is a treat, and I plan to add additional appendices over time, so the download file will be updated occasionally. (2) Please send me a quick email at Christopher-Horne@utc.edu letting me know you’re using it. I certainly welcome your feedback as well. Thank you, and best wishes for successful research methods instruction.

In these homework exercises, students manipulate two- and three- component phase diagrams. At various points during their interpretation of melting or crystallization of a composition, they are asked to visualize/sketch the resulting rock (in thin section) if it were quenched at that point. They are also required to know how to determine how many phases are in equilibrium and the proportions (or percentages) of those phases at any given point during the evolution of a given magma. These exercises require that students understand Gibb's phase rule (and the condensed phase rule), the lever rule and how to determine liquid and solid (both instantaneous and bulk) compositions. In all, there are 4 binary and 6 ternary phase diagram exercises that are each 1-3 pages in length. I have also included an exercise that introduces phase diagrams and the phase rule (developed with Daniel Brabander). We developed these exercises while at Boston University because we felt that conventional exercises taught the students how to manipulate the diagrams but students could not make the connection to what they are seeing in hand sample and in thin section. We have since found that students were better able to apply the concepts of phase diagrams to their hands-on laboratory exercises.

(Note: this resource was added to OER Commons as part of a batch upload of over 2,200 records. If you notice an issue with the quality of the metadata, please let us know by using the 'report' button and we will flag it for consideration.)

                                          தமிழில் உள்ள நூல்களிலேயே சிறப்பிடம் பெற்ற நூல் திருக்குறள். இது அடிப்படையில் ஒரு வாழ்வியல் நூல். மனிதர்களின் வாழ்வின் முக்கிய அங்கங்களாகிய அறம் அல்லது தர்மம், பொருள், இன்பம் அல்லது காமம் ஆகியவற்றைப் பற்றி விளக்கும் நூல்.