By Alex Stewart, Deputy Managing Editor, Experimental Physiology, @ExpPhysiol
Experimental Physiology (EP) is delighted to have published its inaugural Registered Report Protocol (RRP), one of the first of its kind in the discipline of physiology (1).
Registered reports are a form of research article in which a proposed study’s methods and analyses are peer reviewed prior to any research being conducted.
EP has offered authors the option to submit in this format since June 2020, as a commitment to improving the transparency and reproducibility of the science it publishes.
This format is designed to minimise biases such as publication bias, which can result in decisions on publication suitability being made dependent on the perceived importance of observed findings and results, as opposed to solely on the quality of the research question and science performed.
Such bias can distort scientific literature, resulting in long-term negative impacts on the application of research and hindering scientific progress.
An additional benefit of the registered reports article type is that it prevents studies with fundamental design flaws being conducted, preventing the wastage of time and funding.
Given many scientists are still locked out of their labs due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this article type will help researchers constructively plan ahead for experiments they will conduct when they return, and also buy them back some lost time in the publication process.
RRPs in our journal consist of an introduction, proposed methods (including statistical analyses), and may include pilot data, although this is not mandatory.
If our peer reviewers decide that the proposed research question is important, and proposed methods are sound, these RRPs will be accepted and published.
Acceptance of an RRP also gives in-principle acceptance to the completed study regardless of the observed results, assuming that the methods are carried out in accordance with the RRP, and the conclusions drawn are appropriate.
The first accepted RRP was submitted by a research team from the University of Bath, who will be investigating the effects of a 6-week home-based High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) intervention on cardiometabolic risks in persons with chronic paraplegia.
Individuals with a spinal cord injury (SCI) are at an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease and have a multitude of elevated cardiometabolic risks.
While continuous moderate-intensity exercise appears to have limited impact on some biomarkers of cardiometabolic risk, the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) has yet to be determined for this population.
Higher-intensity exercise training may therefore be a viable option for improving cardiometabolic risk management in people with SCI.
Corresponding author and Principal Investigator Professor James Bilzon commented on the value of expert peer review prior to starting his team’s study:
“The statistical review was particularly critical and supportive, allowing us to make a number of adjustments to recruitment and analysis plans. Such reviews are not easily accessible to all scholars in our field.”
“This has allowed us to move forward with confidence that, on completion, regardless of the trial outcomes, this research should be publishable in a high-quality journal such as Experimental Physiology,” he continued.
The is the final study of PhD student Matt Farrow’s programme. Farrow, who will be leading on recruitment and data collection, explains that he was “ very keen to ensure that we deliver this study to the highest possible standards, with confidence that, regardless of the trial outcomes, this research should be publishable in a high-quality journal such as Experimental Physiology.”
EP’s Statistics Consultant, Alan Batterham, concludes that “Registered Report Protocols benefit authors, editors and reviewers, and the journal. For authors, the in-principle acceptance of the final study report alleviates concerns that the results might not be interesting or definitive enough for publication in a leading journal. In addition, critical review of the protocol prior to study commencement may improve study quality and impact.
Editors and reviewers benefit by being able to contribute their expertise to study design and methods, reducing the risk of methodological issues arising, while for the journal, RRPs result in better research, with greater transparency and reproducibility.
References
- This journal also published Registered Reports on the subject of physiology https://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-psychophysiology