Published in PLoS One on April 21, 2010
Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature (2012) 20.64
A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research. Nature (2012) 14.63
Deep impact: unintended consequences of journal rank. Front Hum Neurosci (2013) 2.78
US studies may overestimate effect sizes in softer research. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 2.06
Negativity towards negative results: a discussion of the disconnect between scientific worth and scientific culture. Dis Model Mech (2014) 1.90
Reforming science: methodological and cultural reforms. Infect Immun (2011) 1.85
Why growing retractions are (mostly) a good sign. PLoS Med (2013) 1.57
Researchers' Individual Publication Rate Has Not Increased in a Century. PLoS One (2016) 1.48
Phosphorylated AKT expression is associated with PIK3CA mutation, low stage, and favorable outcome in 717 colorectal cancers. Cancer (2010) 1.48
Examining the Predictive Validity of NIH Peer Review Scores. PLoS One (2015) 1.45
A critical analysis of test-retest reliability in instrument validation studies of cancer patients under palliative care: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol (2014) 1.31
Enhancing credibility of chemical safety studies: emerging consensus on key assessment criteria. Environ Health Perspect (2010) 1.15
Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity. PLoS One (2015) 1.12
Confirmation bias in studies of nestmate recognition: a cautionary note for research into the behaviour of animals. PLoS One (2013) 1.05
Unaffected perceptual thresholds for biological and non-biological form-from-motion perception in autism spectrum conditions. PLoS One (2010) 1.04
Using publication metrics to highlight academic productivity and research impact. Acad Emerg Med (2014) 1.02
Science of weight loss supplements: compromised by conflicts of interest? World J Gastroenterol (2010) 1.02
Quantifying selective reporting and the Proteus phenomenon for multiple datasets with similar bias. PLoS One (2011) 1.02
Competitive science: is competition ruining science? Infect Immun (2015) 1.01
Irreproducible experimental results: causes, (mis)interpretations, and consequences. Circulation (2012) 1.01
Promoting research integrity in Africa: an African voice of concern on research misconduct and the way forward. Dev World Bioeth (2013) 1.00
Negative results: negative perceptions limit their potential for increasing reproducibility. J Negat Results Biomed (2015) 0.97
Publication pressure and burn out among Dutch medical professors: a nationwide survey. PLoS One (2013) 0.94
Report the awful truth! Nat Nanotechnol (2013) 0.90
A meta-review of evidence on heart failure disease management programs: the challenges of describing and synthesizing evidence on complex interventions. Trials (2011) 0.90
Foetal origins of depression? A systematic review and meta-analysis of low birth weight and later depression. Psychol Med (2012) 0.89
Managing risks in drug discovery: reproducibility of published findings. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol (2016) 0.87
TGFBR2 and BAX mononucleotide tract mutations, microsatellite instability, and prognosis in 1072 colorectal cancers. PLoS One (2011) 0.86
From hot hands to declining effects: the risks of small numbers. J Am Coll Cardiol (2012) 0.86
Why are medical and health-related studies not being published? A systematic review of reasons given by investigators. PLoS One (2014) 0.86
Preventing the ends from justifying the means: withholding results to address publication bias in peer-review. BMC Psychol (2016) 0.84
Evaluation of stromal HGF immunoreactivity as a biomarker for melanoma response to RAF inhibitors. Mod Pathol (2014) 0.83
What is open peer review? A systematic review. F1000Res (2017) 0.83
The Researchers' View of Scientific Rigor-Survey on the Conduct and Reporting of In Vivo Research. PLoS One (2016) 0.83
Resolving the negative data publication dilemma in translational stroke research. Transl Stroke Res (2011) 0.82
Study factors influencing ventricular enlargement in schizophrenia: a 20 year follow-up meta-analysis. Neuroimage (2011) 0.82
Factors associated with research wrongdoing in Nigeria. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics (2012) 0.77
Acupuncture for neurogenesis in experimental ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep (2016) 0.77
Statistical Rigor and the Perils of Chance. eNeuro (2016) 0.77
Authentication: A Standard Problem or a Problem of Standards? PLoS Biol (2016) 0.77
False data, positive results in neurobiology: moving beyond the epigenetics of blood and saliva samples in mental disorders. J Negat Results Biomed (2016) 0.76
Life Science's Average Publishable Unit (APU) Has Increased over the Past Two Decades. PLoS One (2016) 0.75
Coding of attention across the human intraparietal sulcus. Exp Brain Res (2015) 0.75
Bayesian evaluation of effect size after replicating an original study. PLoS One (2017) 0.75
Novel or reproducible: That is the question. Glycobiology (2016) 0.75
How far will a behaviourally flexible invasive bird go to innovate? R Soc Open Sci (2016) 0.75
Debunking the Myth of Value-Neutral Virginity: Toward Truth in Scientific Advertising. Front Psychol (2016) 0.75
Meta-assessment of bias in science. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2017) 0.75
Bias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensus. BMJ Open (2016) 0.75
Fire-Needle Moxibustion for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Analysis. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med (2016) 0.75
Anchoring the Self to the Body in Bilateral Vestibular Failure. PLoS One (2017) 0.75
The effects of cervical transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation on motor pathways supplying the upper limb in humans. PLoS One (2017) 0.75
Contradicting/negative results in clinical research: Why (do we get these)? Why not (get these published)? Where (to publish)? Perspect Clin Res (2014) 0.75
Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA (2004) 23.87
Assessing the probability that a positive report is false: an approach for molecular epidemiology studies. J Natl Cancer Inst (2004) 19.00
Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ (2003) 18.72
Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA (2003) 16.08
Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS One (2008) 13.32
Scientists behaving badly. Nature (2005) 12.79
How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS One (2009) 11.72
Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2007) 7.52
Publication and related biases. Health Technol Assess (2000) 6.47
Normal Misbehavior: Scientists Talk about the Ethics of Research. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics (2006) 3.25
What determines the citation frequency of ecological papers? Trends Ecol Evol (2005) 3.13
"Positive" results increase down the Hierarchy of the Sciences. PLoS One (2010) 2.80
Time to publication for results of clinical trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2007) 2.59
Almost all articles on cancer prognostic markers report statistically significant results. Eur J Cancer (2007) 2.46
HARKing: hypothesizing after the results are known. Pers Soc Psychol Rev (1998) 2.42
International ranking systems for universities and institutions: a critical appraisal. BMC Med (2007) 2.31
Statistical power of articles published in three health psychology-related journals. Health Psychol (2001) 2.23
The perverse effects of competition on scientists' work and relationships. Sci Eng Ethics (2007) 2.07
Normative dissonance in science: results from a national survey of u.s. Scientists. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics (2007) 2.02
Publication bias in ecology and evolution: an empirical assessment using the 'trim and fill' method. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc (2002) 1.76
Country development and manuscript selection bias: a review of published studies. BMC Med Res Methodol (2006) 1.61
Inadequate statistical power of negative clinical trials in urological literature. J Urol (2006) 1.49
Causal factors implicated in research misconduct: evidence from ORI case files. Sci Eng Ethics (2007) 1.44
Citation bias of hepato-biliary randomized clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol (2002) 1.36
Citations to trials of nicotine replacement therapy were biased toward positive results and high-impact-factor journals. J Clin Epidemiol (2009) 1.12
Breeding cheats. Nature (2007) 1.06
Factors influencing editors' decision on acceptance or rejection of manuscripts: the authors' perspective. Arch Iran Med (2008) 1.00