Genetics & Genomics Next editors may return to authors and peer
reviewers their assessment of improvements in metadata, data access or
reporting transparency that might improve the impact of the article by
enabling reproducible research. In some cases, these improvements might
need to be made as a precondition for peer review.
This checklist incorporates community ideas for good research practice:
Citation Standards
- All data sets and code are cited in the text as References
- Persistent URI or DOI for data sets and code
- Citation in Reference section contains author/title/year/URI
Data, Code, and Materials Transparency
- Are the following present and sufficient to independently reproduce all
claimed results?
For reused public datasets:
- data URIs, program code, statistics
scripts
For new data and resources
- New data available at a trusted digital repository OR all available
in paper
- Variables, parameters, treatment conditions, and observation
(number)
- Full procedures for collection, preprocessing, cleaning, or
generating the data
- Code, scripts, codebooks, algorithms (URI or all in paper)
- Research materials (description and source) and procedures necessary
to conduct an independent replication of the research.
Exceptions for ethical or legal restrictions to reproducible research
- Conditions on the dataset or materials that restrict researcher
access and use
- Access protocol for data or materials
- Access to software and other documentation
- Indicate all data and materials without the above constraints
Resources available at a community-endorsed public repository
- Authors request delay of access until publication
- Do the editors identify any factors that might delay peer review/
delay acceptance for publication/ require editorial explanation upon
publication /need expression of editorial concern / risk author
might need to retract because of reproducibility concerns?
Design and Analysis Transparency
- Authors declare reporting is in accordance with community standards
listed on http://www.equator-network.org/ or https://fairsharing.org
- Editors recommend the authors check the following community standards
and report their results accordingly
Replication
Since we do not believe that even the best peer reviewed experimental
design can overcome sources of variation among studies, the policy of
the journal is to encourage submission of experimental designs that
contain their own replication. We also encourage studies replicating or
powered to replicate work published in this journal.
- Report contains both hypothesis generation and replication in separate
studies
- Report contains an unreplicated study