Skip to content
naulon
Not checkedNot checked for notices yet.

How measurement science can improve confidence in research results.

Anne L Plant, Chandler A Becker, Robert J Hanisch and 3 more

PLoS Biology · 2018

doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2004299 (opens in a new tab)

We email you when a new notice or a question about this paper appears.

Abstract

The current push for rigor and reproducibility is driven by a desire for confidence in research results. Here, we suggest a framework for a systematic process, based on consensus principles of measurement science, to guide researchers and reviewers in assessing, documenting, and mitigating the sources of uncertainty in a study. All study results have associated ambiguities that are not always clarified by simply establishing reproducibility. By explicitly considering sources of uncertainty, noting aspects of the experimental system that are difficult to characterize quantitatively, and proposing alternative interpretations, the researcher provides information that enhances comparability and reproducibility.

Abstract licence: CC0

References26

  1. 5.

25 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.