1.
Boya Xie, Zhihong Shen, Kuansan Wang. Is Preprint the Future of Science? A Thirty Year Journey of Online Preprint Services.; 2021. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2102.09066
Standards, reporting, and preregistration
1.
Natalie Parletta. How to respond to difficult or negative peer-reviewer feedback. Nature Index. 2021. https://www.nature.com/nature-index/news-blog/how-to-respond-difficult-negative-peer-reviewer-feedback.
1.
Monica Piergiovanni, Ozlem Cangar, Sofia B. Leite, et al. Putting Science into Standards workshop on standards for organ-on-chip. Stem Cell Reports. 2021;16(9):2076-2077. doi:10.1016/j.stemcr.2021.07.010
1.
Mira van der Naald, Steven Wenker, Pieter A. Doevendans, Kimberley E. Wever, Steven A. J. Chamuleau. Publication rate in preclinical research: a plea for preregistration. BMJ Open Science. 2020;4(1):e100051. doi:10.1136/bmjos-2019-100051
1.
Thomas Hartung, Rob De Vries, Sebastian Hoffmann, et al. Toward Good In Vitro Reporting Standards. Alternatives to Animal Experimentation. 2019;36(1):3-17. doi:10.14573/altex.1812191
1.
Devang Mehta. Highlight negative results to improve science. Nature. 2019. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02960-3.
1.
David Pamies, Anna Bal-Price, Christophe Chesné, et al. Advanced Good Cell Culture Practice for human primary, stem cell-derived and organoid models as well as microphysiological systems. Alternatives to Animal Experimentation. 2018;35(3):353-378. doi:10.14573/altex.1710081
1.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Guidance Document on Good In Vitro Method Practices (GIVIMP).; 2018. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/guidance-document-on-good-in-vitro-method-practices-givimp_9789264304796-en;jsessionid=lcFblMGZO8qR-_Hk2btN6Zt0lMML8oWdMBQ0gGcK.ip-10-240-5-51.
1.
Brian A. Nosek, Charles R. Ebersole, Alexander C. DeHaven, David T. Mellor. The preregistration revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2018;115(11):2600-2606. doi:10.1073/pnas.1708274114
1.
Mark Rubin. When Does HARKing Hurt? Identifying When Different Types of Undisclosed Post Hoc Hypothesizing Harm Scientific Progress. Review of General Psychology. 2017;21(4):308-320. doi:10.1037/gpr0000128