Meeting summary
The meeting focused on transparent reporting standards in scientific research, with Kimberly and Vahid presenting findings on disciplinary perspectives and tools. Kimberly provided a historical overview of reporting standards in psychology, highlighting how requirements evolved from APA's 2008 guidelines through the replication crisis in 2011, and introduced the JARS (Journal Article Reporting Standards) framework. Vahid presented practical tools and checklists, particularly focusing on CONSER 2025 (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials), which added seven new items including a dedicated open science section with requirements for trial registration, protocol access, and data sharing. The discussion included examples across different disciplines showing how reporting standards have evolved to require more detailed methodological information, and participants shared experiences with implementing transparency requirements in their fields. The conversation ended with plans for the next session on open access publishing and preprints, with Kyle volunteering to co-present that topic.
The meeting began with Brad announcing his early departure at 3:30, followed by introductions and brief updates from participants. Vahid and Kimberly discussed their upcoming presentation on findings related to transparent reporting standards, with Vahid planning to cover tools in the second part. Corin joined late but shared positive feedback about a recent campus program. The session focused on preparing for Meeting 5, where Vahid and Kimberly would present their research findings, with Vahid providing the link to the materials in the chat.
The meeting focused on the challenges and experiences of researchers across disciplines in meeting shifting requirements for transparency and reproducibility in reporting scientific findings. Participants discussed the varying levels of reporting standards across fields, with psychology and clinical trials being more rigorous in recent years. Kimberly highlighted the American Psychological Association's efforts to improve reporting standards, which were accelerated by the replication crisis in 2011. She emphasized the importance of detailed methodological reporting to enable replication and reduce false positives. Vahid was set to discuss the Equator Network, which provides guidelines for reporting health research, but the transcript ended before he could present this information.
Kimberly discussed the importance of transparent reporting in research, highlighting issues with journal word limits, supplemental materials, and the misuse of checklists as quality assessments. She emphasized the need to support exploratory research and addressed gaps in current guidelines for quantitative research in psychology. Vahid then provided a practical overview of finding and using reporting guidelines, focusing on the Ecuador network and specific tools like CONCERT for randomized trials. He explained how to select the appropriate primary guideline for a study and layer on extensions as needed, while avoiding the creation of Frankenstein checklists.
Vahid presented a five-step approach for conducting computational linguistic research using existing reporting guidelines, emphasizing the importance of transparency and partial guideline use. He discussed the Equator Network's tools for finding and using reporting guidelines, including the now-defunct Good Reports website. Vahid also mentioned the CONSORT 2025 guidelines, though the discussion was cut short due to a thunderstorm.
Vahid presented on the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2025, highlighting its major update scheduled for April 2025, which adds seven new checklist items and introduces an open science section. He explained key changes, including a dedicated section for transparency before, during, and after trials, and emphasized the importance of patient and public involvement in trial design. Vahid also discussed how to properly complete the checklist, noting common pitfalls to avoid, and compared CONSORT 2025 with other reporting guidelines like STROBE and PRISMA. He provided examples of poor and improved reporting practices, stressing the need for clear, detailed reporting to make research evaluable and replicable.