ORCID Profile
0000-0002-7490-2600
Current Organisation
Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 14-03-2022
Abstract: Training in robust research practices is becoming increasingly common. However, many course participants may encounter challenges in implementation of what they learned after returning to their research groups. In this piece, we summarize insights and "lessons learned" from a group of former course participants. We offer practical tips on implementation and cultural change that may be useful for researchers at any career stage. In addition, we provide a list of considerations for course instructors to help them support course attendees after training is over.
Publisher: eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
Date: 27-03-2020
DOI: 10.7554/ELIFE.57032
Abstract: The need to protect public health during the current COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated conference cancellations on an unprecedented scale. As the scientific community adapts to new working conditions, it is important to recognize that some of our actions may disproportionately affect early-career researchers and scientists from countries with limited research funding. We encourage all conference organizers, funders and institutions who are able to do so to consider how they can mitigate the unintended consequences of conference and travel cancellations and we provide seven recommendations for how this could be achieved. The proposed solutions may also offer long-term benefits for those who normally cannot attend conferences, and thus lead to a more equitable future for generations of researchers.
Publisher: eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
Date: 07-07-2020
DOI: 10.7554/ELIFE.60438
Abstract: The eLife Early-Career Advisory Group (ECAG), an international group of early-career researchers committed to improving research culture, calls for radical changes at eLife and other journals to address racism in the scientific community and to make science more erse and inclusive.
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 11-06-2021
Abstract: Early career researchers (ECRs) are important stakeholders leading efforts to catalyze systemic change in the conduct and communication of science. Here, we summarize the outputs from a virtual unconventional conference (unconference), which brought together 54 invited experts from 20 countries with extensive experience in ECR initiatives designed to improve science. The event was focused on why ECRs are needed to improve science and the obstacles they face when trying to promote reform. Our discussions also highlighted the additional obstacles that ECRs in countries with limited research funding experience when working to improve the scientific system. We provide the lessons learned from successful ECR-led or ECR-focused initiatives and outline actions that in iduals and organizations can take to further support ECRs who are working to improve research culture and practice.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 2021
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 05-01-2023
DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PCBI.1010750
Abstract: Open, reproducible, and replicable research practices are a fundamental part of science. Training is often organized on a grassroots level, offered by early career researchers, for early career researchers. Buffet style courses that cover many topics can inspire participants to try new things however, they can also be overwhelming. Participants who want to implement new practices may not know where to start once they return to their research team. We describe ten simple rules to guide participants of relevant training courses in implementing robust research practices in their own projects, once they return to their research group. This includes (1) prioritizing and planning which practices to implement, which involves obtaining support and convincing others involved in the research project of the added value of implementing new practices (2) managing problems that arise during implementation and (3) making reproducible research and open science practices an integral part of a future research career. We also outline strategies that course organizers can use to prepare participants for implementation and support them during this process.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 11-06-2022
DOI: 10.1186/S13104-022-06080-6
Abstract: The rising rate of preprints and publications, combined with persistent inadequate reporting practices and problems with study design and execution, have strained the traditional peer review system. Automated screening tools could potentially enhance peer review by helping authors, journal editors, and reviewers to identify beneficial practices and common problems in preprints or submitted manuscripts. Tools can screen many papers quickly, and may be particularly helpful in assessing compliance with journal policies and with straightforward items in reporting guidelines. However, existing tools cannot understand or interpret the paper in the context of the scientific literature. Tools cannot yet determine whether the methods used are suitable to answer the research question, or whether the data support the authors’ conclusions. Editors and peer reviewers are essential for assessing journal fit and the overall quality of a paper, including the experimental design, the soundness of the study’s conclusions, potential impact and innovation. Automated screening tools cannot replace peer review, but may aid authors, reviewers, and editors in improving scientific papers. Strategies for responsible use of automated tools in peer review may include setting performance criteria for tools, transparently reporting tool performance and use, and training users to interpret reports.
Publisher: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Date: 08-10-2020
DOI: 10.1101/2020.10.08.327718
Abstract: Scientists routinely use images to display data. Readers often examine figures first therefore, it is important that figures are accessible to a broad audience. Many resources discuss fraudulent image manipulation and technical specifications for image acquisition however, data on the legibility and interpretability of images are scarce. We systematically examined these factors in non-blot images published in the top 15 journals in three fields plant sciences, cell biology and physiology (n=580 papers). Common problems included missing scale bars, misplaced or poorly marked insets, images or labels that were not accessible to colorblind readers, and insufficient explanations of colors, labels, annotations, or the species and tissue or object depicted in the image. Papers that met all good practice criteria examined for all image-based figures were uncommon (physiology 16%, cell biology 12%, plant sciences 2%). We present detailed descriptions and visual ex les to help scientists avoid common pitfalls when publishing images. Our recommendations address image magnification, scale information, insets, annotation, and color and may encourage discussion about quality standards for bioimage publishing.
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 07-07-2022
DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PBIO.3001680
Abstract: Early career researchers (ECRs) are important stakeholders leading efforts to catalyze systemic change in research culture and practice. Here, we summarize the outputs from a virtual unconventional conference (unconference), which brought together 54 invited experts from 20 countries with extensive experience in ECR initiatives designed to improve the culture and practice of science. Together, we drafted 2 sets of recommendations for (1) ECRs directly involved in initiatives or activities to change research culture and practice and (2) stakeholders who wish to support ECRs in these efforts. Importantly, these points apply to ECRs working to promote change on a systemic level, not only those improving aspects of their own work. In both sets of recommendations, we underline the importance of incentivizing and providing time and resources for systems-level science improvement activities, including ECRs in organizational decision-making processes, and working to dismantle structural barriers to participation for marginalized groups. We further highlight obstacles that ECRs face when working to promote reform, as well as proposed solutions and ex les of current best practices. The abstract and recommendations for stakeholders are available in Dutch, German, Greek (abstract only), Italian, Japanese, Polish, Portuguese, Spanish, and Serbian.
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 31-03-2021
DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PBIO.3001161
Abstract: Scientists routinely use images to display data. Readers often examine figures first therefore, it is important that figures are accessible to a broad audience. Many resources discuss fraudulent image manipulation and technical specifications for image acquisition however, data on the legibility and interpretability of images are scarce. We systematically examined these factors in non-blot images published in the top 15 journals in 3 fields plant sciences, cell biology, and physiology ( n = 580 papers). Common problems included missing scale bars, misplaced or poorly marked insets, images or labels that were not accessible to colorblind readers, and insufficient explanations of colors, labels, annotations, or the species and tissue or object depicted in the image. Papers that met all good practice criteria examined for all image-based figures were uncommon (physiology 16%, cell biology 12%, plant sciences 2%). We present detailed descriptions and visual ex les to help scientists avoid common pitfalls when publishing images. Our recommendations address image magnification, scale information, insets, annotation, and color and may encourage discussion about quality standards for bioimage publishing.
Publisher: eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
Date: 26-01-2021
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 31-10-2020
Abstract: Reproducibility is a cornerstone of the scientific method and sets apart science from pseudoscience. Unfortunately, a majority of scientists have experienced difficulties in reproducing their own or someone else’s results. This inability to confirm scientific findings negatively impacts in idual scientists, funding bodies, academic journals, pharmaceutical drug development and the public’s perception of science. Factors causing irreproducible results can arise from nearly every aspect of the scientific process, and typically reflect a lack of in-depth training in reproducible research practices. Here, we present the Reproducibility for Everyone (R4E) initiative, a collaboration between researchers from erse scientific disciplines and industry partners who aspire to promote open and reproducible research practices. We have developed a customizable workshop series targeting researchers at all levels and across disciplines. Our workshop series covers the conceptual framework of reproducible research practices followed by an overview of actionable research practices. To date, we have reached more than 2000 researchers through over 25 workshops held at international conferences and local meetings. By incorporating further contributions from the scientific community, we hope to expand this valuable resource for teaching transparent and reproducible research practices. Our initiative demonstrates how a shared set of materials may form the basis for a global initiative to improve reproducibility in science. The workshop materials, including accompanying resources, are available under a CC-BY 4.0 license at www.repro4everyone.org.
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 11-02-2020
Publisher: eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
Date: 21-06-2021
DOI: 10.7554/ELIFE.64719
Abstract: Open and reproducible research practices increase the reusability and impact of scientific research. The reproducibility of research results is influenced by many factors, most of which can be addressed by improved education and training. Here we describe how workshops developed by the Reproducibility for Everyone (R4E) initiative can be customized to provide researchers at all career stages and across most disciplines with education and training in reproducible research practices. The R4E initiative, which is led by volunteers, has reached more than 3000 researchers worldwide to date, and all workshop materials, including accompanying resources, are available under a CC-BY 4.0 license at www.repro4everyone.org/ .
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 28-05-2023
Abstract: Across disciplines, researchers increasingly recognize that open science and reproducible research practices may accelerate scientific progress by allowing others to reuse research outputs and by promoting rigorous research that is more likely to yield trustworthy results. While initiatives, training programs, and funder policies encourage researchers to adopt reproducible research and open science practices, these practices are uncommon in many fields. Researchers need training to integrate these practices into their daily work. We organized a virtual brainstorming event, in collaboration with the German Reproducibility Network, to discuss strategies for making reproducible research and open science training the norm at research institutions. Here, we outline eleven strategies, concentrated in three areas: (1) offering training, (2) adapting research assessment criteria and program requirements, and (3) building communities. We provide a brief overview of each strategy, offer tips for implementation, and provide links to resources. Our goal is to encourage members of the research community to think creatively about the many ways they can contribute and collaborate to build communities, and make reproducible research and open science training the norm. Researchers may act in their roles as scientists, supervisors, mentors, instructors, and members of curriculum, hiring or evaluation committees. Institutional leadership and research administration and support staff can accelerate progress by implementing change across their institutions.
Location: Germany
Location: United States of America
No related grants have been discovered for Tracey Weissgerber.