Skip to content

GCRI · Labs

Reprodutibilidade e resultados negativos

Science corrects itself only when failures are recorded: replications that did not reproduce, experiments that found nothing, errors found after publication. Many of these records never appear, so the published literature overstates effects and certainty. This page sets out how irreproducibility arises, how replication and correction work, which records exist, and what editors, integrity offices and funders rely on when they correct or retract.

01Registrar

Reproducibility and negative results on the record.

02A pergunta

Reproducibility and negative results: how the risk develops.

Failure records and corrections. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.

Mecanismo

Publication bias filters the record

Significant, novel results are more likely to be written up, accepted and cited than null ones. The literature then shows a biased sample of what was studied, and meta-analyses inherit the bias.

Mecanismo

Errors propagate through citation

A flawed or retracted paper keeps being cited, often without mention of its status. Reviews, guidelines and later studies that build on it carry the error forward, sometimes long after the notice.

Mecanismo

Reproduction fails for ordinary reasons

Missing code, undocumented software versions, unshared reagents, unclear methods and lost raw data stop others from repeating an analysis or experiment, even when the original work was honest.

Mecanismo

Correction is slow and uneven

Investigations take time, journals differ in how they flag problems, and retraction notices can be vague. Readers may not learn that a paper was corrected, and databases may not carry the notice forward.

03Monitoramento

Quadro de protocolos e replicações.

A tela que uma equipe usaria para acompanhar esta matéria: suas medidas, estados e decisões. Os nomes são exemplos e os valores são ilustrativos.

Painel de protocolos e replicação

Reproducibility and negative results · Labs · Quarter 1

Duas replicações em execuçãoGCRI · Labs

Protocolos

PR-594 sensor driftExperiência de campoSimAprovadoEm execução
PR-714 AI triageAleatorizadoSimCondiçõesConfiguração
PR-551 message recallExperiência por inquéritoSimAprovadoCompleto
PR-896 heat exposureCoorteNãoPendenteRascunho

Replication R-20

Efeito original
0.3 SD
Efeito de réplica
0.3 SD
Veredicto
Menor, mesmo sinal
Publicado
com dados e código

Disponibilidade dos bancos de ensaio

Protocol and replication board: the screen’s structure, terms and states for Reproducibility and negative results.Nomes de exemplo e valores ilustrativos; um projeto, não um registro nem um sistema ativo.
04In the five domains

Negative results matter in every domain.

Negative results are published in the série Labs Evidence. The National Academies’ report (2019) distinguishes reproducibility from replicability; DORA (2012) supports assessing research on its merits.

  • Negative results.
  • Replication attempts.
05Métodos e evidência

How reproducibility and negative results is modelled, measured and tested.

O modelo, os seus pressupostos, os seus dados e a sua incerteza, na forma que um cientista ou engenheiro verificaria. As estruturas seguem métodos publicados. Os valores representados são ilustrativos, não conclusões.

Modelo, equações e pressupostos

The model structure used for reproducibility and negative results, the assumptions it makes and how each is tested.

Risco do elemento iRi = f(Hi, Ei, Vi, Ci)ameaça, exposição, vulnerabilidade e capacidade de enfrentamento
Perda anual esperadaEAL = ∑k pk · Lksobre os eventos k com probabilidade anual pk
Sistemas acopladosxt+1 = A xt + B ut + εtA carries the couplings, u the shock, ε the error
PressupostoPorque é feitoComo é testado
A ameaça e a exposição são independentes dentro de um eventoMantém tratável o integral de perdasComparar com um ajuste de cópula sobre registros conjuntos
Os acoplamentos são lineares perto do ponto de funcionamentoPermite que os choques se propaguem através de APerturbar para além do intervalo linear e comparar
As curvas de vulnerabilidade transferem-se entre lugaresAs curvas locais raramente estão disponíveisValidar face às perdas observadas quando existam
Entradas
conjuntos de dados versionados com proveniência
Resultados
distribuições, nunca números isolados
Código
publicado com a ficha de modelo e os testes
Reprodução
mesmos dados, código, ambiente e semente
Formulações padrão de risco e de espaço de estados; os pressupostos listados são típicos do método, indicados para revisão, não resultados.
Princípios orientadores FAIR · GO FAIR e FORCE11W3C PROV · World Wide Web ConsortiumOrientação sobre o tratamento consistente das incertezas · IPCCCEOS Analysis Ready Data · Committee on Earth Observation Satellites
06Indicadores

O que é medido e com que qualidade.

Cada indicador leva sua unidade, sua periodicidade, o tipo de fonte por trás dele e a etiqueta de evidência que um valor levaria. Nenhum valor é mostrado: um programa os fornece sob sua própria autoridade.

IndicadorUnidadeCadênciaTipo de fonteRótulo
Computational reproducibilitypercent of sampled studies regenerated from shared code and dataper auditReproducibility auditsOBSERVADO
Replication outcomeproportion of replications meeting the prespecified criterionper programmeCoordinated replication projectsOBSERVADO
Retraction noticescount by field and reasonanualRetraction Watch database via CrossrefEstatísticas publicadas
Time from concern to correctionmesesper caseJournal and integrity office recordsREPORTADO
Post-retraction citationscitations per retracted articleanualCitation data linked to retraction recordsOBSERVADO
Null and negative results depositedcount of recordsanualRepositories and registriesREPORTADO
Data available on requestpercent of articles whose data could be obtainedper auditData request auditsOBSERVADO
07Fontes

De onde vêm as evidências.

Conjuntos de dados públicos nomeados e registros institucionais, cada um com sua classe de licença. As fontes obtidas por acordo só são usadas nos seus termos e nunca são republicadas.

FonteO que ofereceClasse de licença
Retraction Watch database (Crossref)Retractions, corrections and expressions of concern with reasonsAberto, atribuição
Crossref metadata and Crossmark updatesLinks from articles to their corrections and retractionsOpen metadata, no restrictions
OpenAlexWorks, citations, authors and institutions across disciplinesAberto, CC0
FORRT Replication DatabaseReplication attempts and outcomes, mostly in the social and behavioural sciencesAberto, atribuição
OSF projects of coordinated replication programmesProtocols, data and code of large-scale replicationsOpen, licence per project
PubPeerPost-publication comments identifying possible problems in papersFree access, terms of use
Zenodo (CERN)Citable deposits for null results, data and codeOpen, licence per record
08Decisões

Quem decide, e a que servem as evidências.

Laboratórios prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.

Quem decideA perguntaEvidências a que esta página serve
Journal editors and publishersWhether to correct, retract or issue an expression of concernEvidence of error or misconduct, author response, COPE guidance, reproduction attempts
Research integrity officesWhether an allegation is substantiated and what followsRaw data, records, code, interviews and an independent analysis
Financiadores de pesquisaWhether to fund replications and require data and code sharingReproducibility audit results, replication evidence by field, cost of sharing
Guideline developers and systematic reviewersWhether to rely on a study that has been questioned or correctedRetraction and correction status, replication evidence, risk-of-bias assessment

Produtos que este tema gera

  • Replication protocols registered before data collection, with success criteria fixed
  • Reproducibility records listing code, data, environment and the outcome of each rerun
  • Deposits of null and negative results with full methods
  • Correction logs that link each notice to the works affected
09Questões centrais

What experts ask about reproducibility.

  • Can an independent team re-run the analysis from the published data and code?
  • Has the finding been replicated with new data, in a new setting or by a different team?
  • Which null or negative results exist, and where are they recorded?
  • When an error is found, how is it corrected and how are users of the result told?
  • Which parts of a workflow, such as software versions or random seeds, could change the answer?
10Mecanismos e fatores

Why results fail to reproduce.

Many published findings in several disciplines have proved difficult to replicate. The causes are well understood: small samples, flexible analysis, selective reporting, undocumented data processing and incentives that favour novel positive findings. In computational work, results can also depend on software versions, hardware, random seeds and data that change after publication.

Negative results are under-reported because they are harder to publish and seem less interesting. This distorts the evidence base: if only successful trials of an intervention are visible, the intervention looks more effective than it is. Systematic reviews and models built on that evidence inherit the bias.

Corrections matter for the same reason. An error in a widely used dataset or model can propagate into many downstream analyses before it is found.

11Métodos e dados

Practices that support reproducibility.

  1. 01

    Open data and code

    Sharing the materials needed to re-run an analysis, within privacy and licensing limits. Some data cannot be shared and must be described instead.

  2. 02

    Computational environments

    Recording software versions and environments, a practice developed with modelagem reproduzível. Long-term preservation remains hard.

  3. 03

    Registered reports

    Peer review of the protocol before results exist, so publication does not depend on the outcome.

  4. 04

    Correction records

    Dated, visible corrections linked to the original result, rather than silent replacement.

A failed replication does not by itself show the original was wrong; differences in setting, sample or method must be examined before conclusions are drawn.

12Métodos

Como é estudado e o que os métodos não podem dizer.

13Where this page’s references

Where this page’s references lead.

Os organismos e documentos à luz dos quais esta página é lida. O estado e as edições mudam; cada ligação leva ao organismo emissor.

14Perguntas

Perguntas e respostas.

What is the difference between reproducibility and replicability?
In the usage of the US National Academies, reproducibility means obtaining the same results from the same data and code, and replicability means obtaining consistent results from new data. Usage varies by field, so definitions should be stated.
Why publish negative results?
They show what did not work, prevent wasted repetition and correct the bias that makes effects look larger than they are. A well-designed study with a null result is a finding.
Does retraction always mean misconduct?
No. Papers are also retracted for honest error, irreproducible results or publisher problems. COPE guidance asks that each notice states the reason.
Can a retracted paper still be cited?
It can be cited as retracted, for example in studies of the literature. Citing it as valid evidence is an error that reviewers and editors should catch.
Will Labs publish a study that found nothing?
Yes. A well-conducted study with a null result is designed to be recorded with the same detail as a positive one.
How do I report an error in a Labs result?
Use the correction routes on the Labs trust page. A confirmação de recebimento traz uma referência e indica a próxima etapa.
Are corrected results removed?
No. The original stays visible with a dated correction, so anyone who used it can see what changed.
RelatóriosContribuir

Contribua com evidências a partir desta página.

Relatórios is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.

GCRILaboratóriosEvidências de LabsMétodos e documentos técnicos
Laboratórios

Traga um método, um conjunto de dados ou uma pergunta.

A informação e os pedidos estão abertos hoje. Um pedido recebe uma referência e indica o próximo passo; candidaturas, pagamentos, alocações de computação e registros só abrem quando existem a equipa, os termos e a capacidade de revisão.