Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Apr 24;4(2):e12235.
doi: 10.1002/jcv2.12235. eCollection 2024 Jun.

On the value of meta-research for early career researchers: A commentary

Nicholas Fabiano  1 , Arnav Gupta  2   3 , Jess G Fiedorowicz  1   4   5   6 , Marco Solmi  1   4   5   6   7
Affiliations

On the value of meta-research for early career researchers: A commentary

Nicholas Fabiano et al. JCPP Adv. .

Abstract

Meta-research, also known as "research on research" is a field of study that investigates the methods, reporting, reproducibility, evaluation, and incentives along the research continuum. Meta-research literacy is imperative to ensure high quality, transparent and reproducible primary data or meta-research products. In this commentary, we propose that early career researchers should be trained in meta-research as a foundation to develop a deeper understanding of the research process and ability to appraise the research literature and design high-quality original studies, irrespective of their chosen field of study. We discuss the importance of meta-research and open science from the perspective of an early career trainee, highlighting essential areas for growth and obstacles one may encounter.

Keywords: early career researcher; meta‐research; open science; trainee.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

MS received honoraria/has been a consultant for Abbvie, Angelini, Lundbeck, Otsuka, unrelated to this work.

References

    1. Aksnes, D. W. , Langfeldt, L. , & Wouters, P. (2019). Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: An overview of basic concepts and theories. Sage Open, 9(1), 2158244019829575. 10.1177/2158244019829575 - DOI
    1. Barnes, C. (2017). The h‐index debate: An introduction for librarians. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 43(6), 487–494. 10.1016/j.acalib.2017.08.013 - DOI
    1. Bornmann, L. , & Daniel, H. (2009). The state of h index research: Is the h index the ideal way to measure research performance? EMBO Reports, 10(1), 2–6. 10.1038/embor.2008.233 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Carroll, C. , & Booth, A. (2015). Quality assessment of qualitative evidence for systematic review and synthesis: Is it meaningful, and if so, how should it be performed?: Quality assessment of qualitative evidence. Research Synthesis Methods, 6(2), 149–154. 10.1002/jrsm.1128 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chan, A. W. , Pello, A. , Kitchen, J. , Axentiev, A. , Virtanen, J. I. , Liu, A. , & Hemminki, E. (2017). Association of trial registration with reporting of primary outcomes in protocols and publications. JAMA, 318(17), 1709–1711. 10.1001/jama.2017.13001 - DOI - PMC - PubMed