48 lines
5.9 KiB
Markdown
48 lines
5.9 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
title: "Metascience"
|
||
chunk: 6/7
|
||
source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metascience"
|
||
category: "reference"
|
||
tags: "science, encyclopedia"
|
||
date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:42:16.492073+00:00"
|
||
instance: "kb-cron"
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
==== As and for acceleration of progress ====
|
||
A study suggests that improving the way science is done could accelerate the rate of scientific discovery and its applications which could be useful for finding urgent solutions to humanity's problems, improve humanity's conditions, and enhance understanding of nature. Metascientific studies can seek to identify aspects of science that need improvement, and develop ways to improve them. If science is accepted as the fundamental engine of economic growth and social progress, this could raise "the question of what we – as a society – can do to accelerate science, and to direct science toward solving society's most important problems." One author clarified that funding science requires diverse approaches rather than a single model. DARPA models, curiosity-driven research, peer-champion mechanisms, and other approaches each have merit and application in different contexts. Nevertheless, evaluation of them can help build knowledge of what works or works best.
|
||
|
||
== Reforms ==
|
||
Meta-research identifying flaws in scientific practice has inspired reforms in science. These reforms seek to address and fix problems in scientific practice which lead to low-quality or inefficient research.
|
||
A 2015 study lists "fragmented" efforts in meta-research.
|
||
|
||
=== Pre-registration ===
|
||
|
||
The practice of registering a scientific study before it is conducted is called pre-registration. It arose as a means to address the replication crisis. Pregistration requires the submission of a registered report, which is then accepted for publication or rejected by a journal based on theoretical justification, experimental design, and the proposed statistical analysis. Pre-registration of studies serves to prevent publication bias (e.g. not publishing negative results), reduce data dredging, and increase replicability.
|
||
|
||
=== Reporting standards ===
|
||
|
||
Studies showing poor consistency and quality of reporting have demonstrated the need for reporting standards and guidelines in science, which has led to the rise of organisations that produce such standards, such as CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) and the EQUATOR Network.
|
||
The EQUATOR network (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) is an international initiative that develops and promotes reporting guidelines for health research to improve the quality and reliability of medical literature. The EQUATOR Network was established with the goals of raising awareness of the importance of good reporting of research, assisting in the development, dissemination and implementation of reporting guidelines for different types of study designs, monitoring the status of the quality of reporting of research studies in the health sciences literature, and conducting research relating to issues that impact the quality of reporting of health research studies. The Network acts as an "umbrella" organisation, bringing together developers of reporting guidelines, medical journal editors and peer reviewers, research funding bodies, and other key stakeholders with a mutual interest in improving the quality of research publications and research itself.
|
||
|
||
== Applications ==
|
||
|
||
=== Information and communications technologies ===
|
||
|
||
Metascience is used in the creation and improvement of technical systems (ICTs) and standards of science evaluation, incentivation, communication, commissioning, funding, regulation, production, management, use and publication. Such can be called "applied metascience" and may seek to explore ways to increase quantity, quality and positive impact of research. One example for such is the development of alternative metrics.
|
||
|
||
==== Study screening and feedback ====
|
||
Various websites or tools also identify inappropriate studies and/or enable feedback such as PubPeer, Cochrane's Risk of Bias Tool and RetractionWatch. Medical and academic disputes are as ancient as antiquity and a study calls for research into "constructive and obsessive criticism" and into policies to "help strengthen social media into a vibrant forum for discussion, and not merely an arena for gladiator matches". Feedback to studies can be found via altmetrics which is often integrated at the website of the study – most often as an embedded Altmetrics badge – but may often be incomplete, such as only showing social media discussions that link to the study directly but not those that link to news reports about the study. (see above)
|
||
|
||
==== Tools used, modified, extended or investigated ====
|
||
Tools may get developed with metaresearch or can be used or investigated by such. Notable examples may include:
|
||
|
||
Search engines like Google Scholar are used to find studies and the notification service Google Alerts enables notifications for new studies matching specified search terms. Scholarly communication infrastructure includes search databases.
|
||
Shadow library Sci-hub is a topic of metascience
|
||
Personal knowledge management systems for research-, knowledge- and task management, such as saving information in organized ways with multi-document text editors for future use Such systems could be described as part of, along with e.g. Web browser (tabs-addons etc) and search software, "mind-machine partnerships" that could be investigated by metascience for how they could improve science.
|
||
Scholia – efforts to open scholarly publication metadata and use it via Wikidata. (see above)
|
||
Various software enables common metascientific practices such as bibliometric analysis.
|
||
|
||
==== Development ====
|
||
According to a study "a simple way to check how often studies have been repeated, and whether or not the original findings are confirmed" is needed due to reproducibility issues in science. A study suggests a tool for screening studies for early warning signs for research fraud.
|
||
|
||
=== Medicine === |