Reproducibility and transparency characteristics of oncology research evidence

Abstract Introduction As much as 50%-90% of research is estimated to be irreproducible, costing upwards of $28 billion in the United States alone. Reproducible research practices are essential to improving the reproducibility and transparency of biomedical research, such as including pre-registering studies, publishing a protocol, making research data and metadata publicly available, and publishing in open access journals. Here we report an investigation of key reproducible or transparent research practices in the published oncology literature. Methods We performed a cross-sectional analysis of a random sample of 300 oncology studies published from 2014-2018. We extracted key reproducibility and transparency characteristics in a duplicative fashion by blinded investigators using a pilot tested Google Form. Results Of the 300 studies randomly sampled, 296 studies were analyzed for study reproducibility characteristics. Of these 296 studies, 194 were contained empirical data that could be analyzed for reproducible and transparent research practices. Raw data was available for 9 studies (4.6%). Approximately 5 studies (2.6%) provided a protocol. Despite our sample including 15 clinical trials and 7 systematic reviews/meta-analyses, only 7 included a pre-registration statement. Less than 25% (65/194) of studies provided an author conflict of interest statement. Discussion We found that key reproducibility and transparency characteristics were absent from a random sample of published oncology studies. We recommend required pre-registration for all eligible trials and systematic reviews, published protocols for all manuscripts, and deposition of raw data and metadata in public repositories.