The resource identification initiative: a cultural shift in publishing
Open accessAbstract
A central tenet in support of research reproducibility is the ability to uniquely identify research resources, i.e., reagents, tools, and materials that are used to perform experiments. However, current reporting practices for research resources are insufficient to allow humans and algorithms to identify the exact resources that are reported or answer basic questions such as “What other studies used resource X?” To address this issue, the Resource Identification Initiative was launched as a pilot project to improve the reporting standards for research resources in the methods sections of papers and thereby improve identifiability and reproducibility. The pilot engaged over 25 biomedical journal editors from most major publishers, as well as scientists and funding officials. Authors were asked to include Research Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) in their manuscripts prior to publication for three resource types: antibodies, model organisms, and tools (including software and databases). RRIDs represent accession numbers assigned by an authoritative database, e.g., the model organism databases, for each type of resource. To make it easier for authors to obtain RRIDs, resources were aggregated from the appropriate databases and their RRIDs made available in a central web portal ( www.scicrunch.org/resources ). RRIDs meet three key criteria: they are machine readable, free to generate and access, and are consistent across publishers and journals. The pilot was launched in February of 2014 and over 300 papers have appeared that report RRIDs. The number of journals participating has expanded from the original 25 to more than 40. Here, we present an overview of the pilot project and its outcomes to date. We show that authors are generally accurate in performing the task of identifying resources and supportive of the goals of the project. We also show that identifiability of the resources pre- and post-pilot showed a dramatic improvement for all three resource types, suggesting that the project has had a significant impact on reproducibility relating to research resources.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Research Resource Identifiers have been shown to decrease CCCM.
“Research Resource Identifiers (”
From The history, landscape, and outlook of human cell line authentication and security (2024) · cites this paper as [129]
The Results section, ‘Outcome #3 Identifiability’ (page not provided), reports that prompting authors to use RRIDs increased the identifiability of research resources. Our copy does not define CCCM or report that RRIDs decreased it; searches for CCCM and related contamination terms found no such outcome. (LLM, conf=0.73)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience
Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafò, M. R. (2013) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3475 · Cited by 7,641 · see citing works
Vasilevsky, N. A., Brush, M. H., Paddock, H., Ponting, L., Tripathy, S. J., LaRocca, G. M., & Haendel, M. A. (2013) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.148 · Cited by 271 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- Bandrowski A Tan S Hof PR: Promoting research resource identification at JCN. J Comp Neurol. 2014; 522(8): 1707. 10.1002/cne.23585 24723247 PMC12965754 · DOI
- Cone AC Ambrosi C Scemes E: A comparative antibody analysis of pannexin1 expression in four rat brain regions reveals varying subcellular localizations. Front Pharmacol. 2013; 4: 6. 10.3389/fphar.2013.00006 23390418 PMC3565217 · DOI
- Gardner D Akil H Ascoli GA: The neuroscience information framework: a data and knowledge environment for neuroscience. Neuroinformatics. 2008; 6(3): 149– 60. 10.1007/s12021-008-9024-z 18946742 PMC2661130 · DOI
- Gronenschild EH Habets P Jacobs HI: The effects of FreeSurfer version, workstation type, and Macintosh operating system version on anatomical volume and cortical thickness measurements. PLoS One. 2012; 7(6): e38234. 10.1371/journal.pone.0038234 22675527 PMC3365894 · DOI
- Herkenham M Rathore P Brown P: Cautionary notes on the use of NF-κB p65 and p50 antibodies for CNS studies. J Neuroinflammation. 2011; 8: 141. 10.1186/1742-2094-8-141 21999414 PMC3210105 · DOI
- Hupé JM: Statistical inferences under the Null hypothesis: common mistakes and pitfalls in neuroimaging studies. Front Neurosci. 2015; 9: 18. 10.3389/fnins.2015.00018 25745383 PMC4333770 · DOI
- International Cell Line Authentication Committee (ICLAC): Cell line cross-contamination: WSU-CLL is a known derivative of REH and is unsuitable as a model for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Leuk Res. 2014; 38(8): 999– 1001. 10.1016/j.leukres.2014.05.003 24923861 · DOI
- Listwak SJ Rathore P Herkenham M: Minimal NF-κB activity in neurons. Neuroscience. 2013; 250: 282– 99. 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.07.013 23872390 PMC3785079 · DOI
- MacLaren DA Markovic T Daniels D: Enhanced consumption of salient solutions following pedunculopontine tegmental lesions. Neuroscience. 2015; 284: 381– 99. 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2014.09.075 25305665 PMC4268404 · DOI
- Marenco LN Wang R Bandrowski AE: Extending the NIF DISCO framework to automate complex workflow: coordinating the harvest and integration of data from diverse neuroscience information resources. Front Neuroinform. 2014; 8: 58. 10.3389/fninf.2014.00058 25018728 PMC4071641 · DOI
- McIntyre NJ Fluck R McIntyre C: Treatment needs and diagnosis awareness in primary care patients with chronic kidney disease. Br J Gen Pract. 2012; 62(597): e227– 32. 10.3399/bjgp12X636047 22520909 PMC3310028 · DOI
- Slotta C Müller J Tran L: An investigation of the specificity of research antibodies against NF-κB-subunit p65. J Histochem Cytochem. 2014; 62(2): 157– 61. 10.1369/0022155413515484 24255050 PMC3902098 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Cellosaurus, a Cell-Line Knowledge Resource
Bairoch, A. (2018) · Journal of Biomolecular Techniques JBT · doi:10.7171/jbt.18-2902-002 · Cited by 807 · see citing works
Best practices in data analysis and sharing in neuroimaging using MRI
Nichols, T. E., Das, S., Eickhoff, S. B., Evans, A. C., Glatard, T., Hanke, M., Kriegeskorte, N., Milham, M. P., Poldrack, R. A., Poline, J.-B., et al. (2017) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.4500 · Cited by 714 · see citing works
On expert curation and scalability: UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot as a case study
Poux, S., Arighi, C. N., Magrane, M., Bateman, A., Wei, C.-H., Lu, Z., Boutet, E., Bye-A-Jee, H., Famiglietti, M. L., Roechert, B., et al. (2017) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btx439 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
The history, landscape, and outlook of human cell line authentication and security
Harbut, E., Makris, Y., Pertsemlidis, A., & Bleris, L. (2024) · SLAS Discovery · doi:10.1016/j.slasd.2024.100194 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Researchers argue for standard format to cite lab resources
Singh Chawla, D. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature.2015.17652 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
- Authors
- Bandrowski, A., Brush, M., Grethe, J. S., Haendel, M. A., Kennedy, D. N., Hill, S., Hof, P. R., Martone, M. E., Pols, M., Tan, S., Washington, N., Zudilova-Seinstra, E., Vasilevsky, N., & https://www.force11.org/node/4463/members, R. I. I. M. A. L. H.
- Affiliations
- University of California San Diego (US)
- Oregon Health & Science University (US)
- University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
- Karolinska Institutet (SE)
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
- Faculty of 1000 (United Kingdom) (GB)
- John Wiley & Sons (United States) (US)
- Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
- Corresponding author
- Bandrowski, Anita
- ORCID
- Venue
- F1000Research
- Publisher
- F1000 Research Ltd
- Published
- 2015-05-29
- Volume
- 4
- Pages
- 134
- ISSN
- 2046-1402 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4648211
- OpenAlex
- W4229945091
- Cited by
- 50
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 14.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- new_version (2015-11-19)
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- F1000Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
- Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (R24OD011883)
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Keywords
- research reproducibility, reporting guidelines, methods section, immunoglobulins, model organisms, research tools, journal editors, scholarly publishing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review