Practical reproducibility: a few steps that will make your paper better

Anita Bandrowski

Specialist, Department of Neurosciences, University of California San Diego

Founder and CEO, SciCrunch

Co-Founder and lead, RRID Initiative

Berlin Institute of Health Visiting Professor, funded by Stiftung Charité

Abstract Are you sick of listening to people drone on and on about reproducibility? Me too, and I am the one talking! Let's take an hour and get something done. I will present some issues and then take some time to help people address the issue in their next paper. Not all things will be relevant to all people, but let's try to make your next paper just a bit better. 

Here are some things I will talk about:

• Protocols.io—Why is a protocol better than a methods section?
• RRID.site—Mouse nicknames and contaminated cell lines; how to avoid them.
• ARRIVE or MDAR guidelines—Rigor criteria are useful, but what if your study was not blinded, can anything be done?
• Data repositories—How many are there and which ones will likely work for my data?
• Code repositories—Let's talk about how to make code persistent and why GitHub is a terrible idea to store code!

Rigor and Reproducibility Seminar Series - UF Interdisciplinary T32 in Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration

This seminar series is jointly hosted by the UF Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration Program and the UF Health Science Center Libraries. Talks focus on rigor and reproducibility topics for the pre-doctoral training program.

This program and seminar series is funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) through T32 NS082128, awarded to PIs Dawn Bowers (College of PHHP) and David E. Vaillancourt (College of HHP).

The seminar will be recorded, with the recording distributed to registered attendees after the event.