Keywords
How to Cite
Abstract
The movement known as reproducible research (RR) has won space in the quantitative research field as a way to increase the confidence in their results. The RR movement proposes that primary data and computer codes used in the research must be publically available to let other researchers verify published results and to conduct alternative analysis. The advantages related to RR apply well to the qualitative researcher’s work, and will increase the confidence and approval of their results, and additionally could provide advantages like the deeper understanding of their findings, the chance to create investigation networks and groups for collaborative knowledge building. The biggest limitations to produce qualitative reproducible research are ethical considerations associated with making sensitive information openly available.
2. Hwang WS, Roh S Il, Lee BC, Kang SK, Kwon DK, Kim S, et al. Patient-specific embryonic stem cells derived from human SCNT blastocysts. Science. 2005;308(5729):1777-83.
3. Kennedy D. Editorial expression of concern. Science. 2006;311(5757):36.
4. Laine C, Goodman SN, Griswold ME, Sox HC. Reproducible research: Moving toward research the public can really trust. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146(6):450-3.
5. Groves T, Godlee F. Open science and reproducible research. BMJ. 2012;344(June):e4383.
6. Anderson C. Presenting and evaluating qualitative research. Am J Pharm Educ. 2010;74(8):1-7.
7. Iqbal SA, Wallach JD, Khoury MJ, Schully SD, Ioannidis JPA. Reproducible research practices and transparency across the biomedical literature. PLoS Biol. 2016;14(1):1-13.
8. Dunning T, Rosenblatt F. Transparency and reproducibility in multi-method research. Rev Cienc Política. 2016;36(3):773-83.
9. Ulin P, Robinson E, Tolley E. El análisis de los datos cualitativos. En: Investigación aplicada en salud pública: Métodos cualitativos. Washington: Organización Panamericana de la Salud; 2006. p. 137-70.
10. Guba EG, Lincoln YS. Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. En: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editores. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 3rd. ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2005. p. 191-215.
11. Leek JT, Peng RD. Opinion: Reproducible research can still be wrong: Adopting a prevention approach. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2015;112(6):1645-6.
12. Williams G, Pigeot I. Consent and confidentiality in the light of recent demands for data sharing. Biometrical J. 2017;59(2):240-50.
13. Oye C, Sorensen NO, Glasdam S. Qualitative research ethics on the spot: Not only on the desktop. Nurs Ethics. 2016;23(4):455-64.
14. Peter E. The ethics in qualitative health research: special considerations. Cien Saude Colet. 2015;20(9):2625-30.
15. Hofner B, Schmid M, Edler L. Reproducible research in statistics: A review and guidelines for the Biometrical Journal. Biometrical J. 2016;58(2):416-27.
This journal is registered under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License. Thus, this work may be reproduced, distributed, and publicly shared in digital format, as long as the names of the authors and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana are acknowledged. Others are allowed to quote, adapt, transform, auto-archive, republish, and create based on this material, for any purpose (even commercial ones), provided the authorship is duly acknowledged, a link to the original work is provided, and it is specified if changes have been made. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana does not hold the rights of published works and the authors are solely responsible for the contents of their works; they keep the moral, intellectual, privacy, and publicity rights.
Approving the intervention of the work (review, copy-editing, translation, layout) and the following outreach, are granted through an use license and not through an assignment of rights. This means the journal and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana cannot be held responsible for any ethical malpractice by the authors. As a consequence of the protection granted by the use license, the journal is not required to publish recantations or modify information already published, unless the errata stems from the editorial management process. Publishing contents in this journal does not generate royalties for contributors.