Quality management for academic laboratories: burden or boon?: Professional quality management could be very beneficial for academic research but needs to overcome specific caveats
Open accessAbstract
Quality management systems have a long and proven track record in many businesses and clinical research. Such systems, when adapting to academic research, have great potential to improve rigor and reproducibility. [Image: see text]
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?
Embedding quality control systems within the routine of academic labs has proved a considerable challenge, and existing initiatives are still at an early stage.
“Embedding quality control systems within the routine of academic labs, as is commonplace in many industries, has proved a considerable challenge, and existing initiatives are still at an early stage [91,92].”
From Open Science 2.0: Towards a truly collaborative research ecosystem (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
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
1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility
Baker, M. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/533452a · Cited by 4,209 · see citing works
Reproducibility crisis: Blame it on the antibodies
Baker, M. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/521274a · Cited by 830 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Guidelines for the use of flow cytometry and cell sorting in immunological studies (third edition)
Cossarizza, A., Chang, H., Radbruch, A., Abrignani, S., Addo, R., Akdis, M., Andrä, I., Andreata, F., Annunziato, F., Arranz, E., et al. (2021) · European Journal of Immunology · doi:10.1002/eji.202170126 · Cited by 531 · see citing works
Open Science 2.0: Towards a truly collaborative research ecosystem
Thibault, R. T., Amaral, O. B., Argolo, F., Bandrowski, A. E., Davidson, A. R., & Drude, N. I. (2023) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002362 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Refining animal research: The Animal Study Registry
Bert, B., Heinl, C., Chmielewska, J., Schwarz, F., Grune, B., Hensel, A., Greiner, M., & Schönfelder, G. (2019) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000463 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Hülsemann, M., Wiebach, J., Drude, N. I., Kniffert, S., Behm, L., Hönzke, K., Baumgardt, M., Hippenstiel, S., Hocke, A. C., Dirnagl, U., et al. (2022) · The EMBO Reports · doi:10.15252/embr.202255095 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Dirnagl, U., Kurreck, C., Castaños‐Vélez, E., & Bernard, R.
- Affiliations
- Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
- Venue
- The EMBO Reports
- Published
- 2018-10-19
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 11
- ISSN
- 1469-221X (ISSN-L)
- 1469-3178
- PMC
- PMC6216282
- OpenAlex
- W2896460201
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 6.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- EMBO Reports (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Volkswagen Foundation
- Innovative Medicines Initiative (777364)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Management Systems and Quality Improvement
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Quality and Management Systems
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Research, Science, and Academia
- Keywords
- quality management systems, university laboratories, research rigor, reproducibility, laboratory quality assurance, research management
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Laboratories, Total Quality Management, Biomedical Research, Translational Research, Biomedical
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
