Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies

  1. Balazs Aczel  Is a corresponding author
  2. Barnabas Szaszi  Is a corresponding author
  3. Gustav Nilsonne
  4. Olmo R van den Akker
  5. Casper J Albers
  6. Marcel ALM van Assen
  7. Jojanneke A Bastiaansen
  8. Daniel Benjamin
  9. Udo Boehm
  10. Rotem Botvinik-Nezer
  11. Laura F Bringmann
  12. Niko A Busch
  13. Emmanuel Caruyer
  14. Andrea M Cataldo
  15. Nelson Cowan
  16. Andrew Delios
  17. Noah N N van Dongen
  18. Chris Donkin
  19. Johnny B van Doorn
  20. Ann Dreber
  21. Gilles Dutilh
  22. Gary F Egan
  23. Morton Ann Gernsbacher
  24. Rink Hoekstra
  25. Sabine Hoffmann
  26. Felix Holzmeister
  27. Juergen Huber
  28. Magnus Johannesson
  29. Kai J Jonas
  30. Alexander T Kindel
  31. Michael Kirchler
  32. Yoram K Kunkels
  33. D Stephen Lindsay
  34. Jean-Francois Mangin
  35. Dora Matzke
  36. Marcus R Munafò
  37. Ben R Newell
  38. Brian A Nosek
  39. Russell A Poldrack
  40. Don van Ravenzwaaij
  41. Jörg Rieskamp
  42. Matthew J Salganik
  43. Alexandra Sarafoglou
  44. Tom Schonberg
  45. Martin Schweinsberg
  46. David Shanks
  47. Raphael Silberzahn
  48. Daniel J Simons
  49. Barbara A Spellman
  50. Samuel St-Jean
  51. Jeffrey J Starns
  52. Eric Luis Uhlmann
  53. Jelte Wicherts
  54. Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
  1. Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary
  2. Karolinska Institutet, Sweden
  3. Tilburg University, Netherlands
  4. University of Groningen, Netherlands
  5. University of Southern California, United States
  6. University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
  7. Dartmouth Collge, United States
  8. University of Muenster, Germany
  9. University of Rennes, France
  10. McLean Hospital, United States
  11. University of Missouri, United States
  12. National University of Singapore, Singapore
  13. University of New South Wales, Australia
  14. Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden
  15. University Hospital Basel, Switzerland
  16. Monash University, Australia
  17. University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States
  18. Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Germany
  19. University of Innsbruck, Austria
  20. Maastricht University, Netherlands
  21. Princeton University, United States
  22. University of Victoria, Canada
  23. Université Paris-Saclay, France
  24. University of Bristol, United Kingdom
  25. Center for Open Science and University of Virginia, United States
  26. Stanford University, United States
  27. University of Basel, Switzerland
  28. Tel Aviv University, Israel
  29. ESMT Berlin, Germany
  30. University College London, United Kingdom
  31. University of Sussex, United Kingdom
  32. University of Illinois, United States
  33. University of Virginia, United States
  34. University of Alberta, Canada
  35. University of Massachusetts Amherst, United States
  36. INSEAD, Singapore

Abstract

Any large dataset can be analyzed in a number of ways, and it is possible that the use of different analysis strategies will lead to different results and conclusions. One way to assess whether the results obtained depend on the analysis strategy chosen is to employ multiple analysts and leave each of them free to follow their own approach. Here, we present consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting such multi-analyst studies, and we discuss how broader adoption of the multi-analyst approach has the potential to strengthen the robustness of results and conclusions obtained from analyses of datasets in basic and applied research.

Data availability

All anonymized data as well as the survey materials are publicly shared on the Open Science Framework page of the project: https://osf.io/4zvst/. Our methodology and data-analysis plan were preregistered. The preregistration document can be accessed at: https://osf.io/dgrua.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Balazs Aczel

    Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
    For correspondence
    balazs.aczel@gmail.com
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9364-4988
  2. Barnabas Szaszi

    Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
    For correspondence
    szaszi.barnabas@ppk.elte.hu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7078-2712
  3. Gustav Nilsonne

    Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5273-0150
  4. Olmo R van den Akker

    Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Casper J Albers

    University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Marcel ALM van Assen

    Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Jojanneke A Bastiaansen

    University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4831-6402
  8. Daniel Benjamin

    University of Southern California, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2642-5416
  9. Udo Boehm

    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8677-0721
  10. Rotem Botvinik-Nezer

    Dartmouth Collge, Hanover, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2669-1877
  11. Laura F Bringmann

    University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8091-9935
  12. Niko A Busch

    Institute of Psychology, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4837-0345
  13. Emmanuel Caruyer

    University of Rennes, Rennes, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8547-7726
  14. Andrea M Cataldo

    McLean Hospital, Belmont, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2787-224X
  15. Nelson Cowan

    University of Missouri, Columbia, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3711-4338
  16. Andrew Delios

    National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6791-227X
  17. Noah N N van Dongen

    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0387-7388
  18. Chris Donkin

    University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  19. Johnny B van Doorn

    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0270-096X
  20. Ann Dreber

    Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3989-9941
  21. Gilles Dutilh

    University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  22. Gary F Egan

    Monash Biomedical Imaging, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3186-4026
  23. Morton Ann Gernsbacher

    University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0397-3329
  24. Rink Hoekstra

    University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1588-7527
  25. Sabine Hoffmann

    Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6197-8801
  26. Felix Holzmeister

    University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9606-0427
  27. Juergen Huber

    University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0073-0321
  28. Magnus Johannesson

    Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8759-6393
  29. Kai J Jonas

    Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  30. Alexander T Kindel

    Princeton University, Princeton, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  31. Michael Kirchler

    University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5416-2545
  32. Yoram K Kunkels

    University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  33. D Stephen Lindsay

    University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  34. Jean-Francois Mangin

    Université Paris-Saclay, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1612-461X
  35. Dora Matzke

    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  36. Marcus R Munafò

    MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  37. Ben R Newell

    University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1898-205X
  38. Brian A Nosek

    Center for Open Science and University of Virginia, Charlottesville, United States
    Competing interests
    Brian A Nosek, Executive Director of the Center for Open Science, a non-profit technology and culture change organization with a mission to increase openness, integrity, and reproducibility of research..
  39. Russell A Poldrack

    Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6755-0259
  40. Don van Ravenzwaaij

    University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5030-4091
  41. Jörg Rieskamp

    Department of Psychology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2632-8015
  42. Matthew J Salganik

    Princeton University, Princeton, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  43. Alexandra Sarafoglou

    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  44. Tom Schonberg

    Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4485-816X
  45. Martin Schweinsberg

    ESMT Berlin, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3529-9463
  46. David Shanks

    University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4600-6323
  47. Raphael Silberzahn

    University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  48. Daniel J Simons

    University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  49. Barbara A Spellman

    University of Virginia, Charlottesville, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  50. Samuel St-Jean

    University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8092-2974
  51. Jeffrey J Starns

    University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  52. Eric Luis Uhlmann

    INSEAD, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  53. Jelte Wicherts

    Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2415-2933
  54. Eric-Jan Wagenmakers

    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.

Funding

Netherlands Organisations for Scientific Research (406-17-568)

  • Alexandra Sarafoglou

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (BP-546283-2020)

  • Samuel St-Jean

Fonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies (290978)

  • Samuel St-Jean

European Research Council (726361)

  • Jelte Wicherts

European Research Council (726361)

  • Olmo R van den Akker

European Research Council (681466)

  • Yoram K Kunkels

VIDI fellowship organisation (016.Vidi.188.001)

  • Don van Ravenzwaaij

VENI fellowship grant (Veni 191G.037)

  • Laura F Bringmann

National Science Foundation (1760052)

  • Matthew J Salganik

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Peter Rodgers, eLife, United Kingdom

Publication history

  1. Received: July 14, 2021
  2. Accepted: November 7, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: November 9, 2021 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: November 26, 2021 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2021, Aczel et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,714
    Page views
  • 217
    Downloads
  • 6
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Balazs Aczel
  2. Barnabas Szaszi
  3. Gustav Nilsonne
  4. Olmo R van den Akker
  5. Casper J Albers
  6. Marcel ALM van Assen
  7. Jojanneke A Bastiaansen
  8. Daniel Benjamin
  9. Udo Boehm
  10. Rotem Botvinik-Nezer
  11. Laura F Bringmann
  12. Niko A Busch
  13. Emmanuel Caruyer
  14. Andrea M Cataldo
  15. Nelson Cowan
  16. Andrew Delios
  17. Noah N N van Dongen
  18. Chris Donkin
  19. Johnny B van Doorn
  20. Ann Dreber
  21. Gilles Dutilh
  22. Gary F Egan
  23. Morton Ann Gernsbacher
  24. Rink Hoekstra
  25. Sabine Hoffmann
  26. Felix Holzmeister
  27. Juergen Huber
  28. Magnus Johannesson
  29. Kai J Jonas
  30. Alexander T Kindel
  31. Michael Kirchler
  32. Yoram K Kunkels
  33. D Stephen Lindsay
  34. Jean-Francois Mangin
  35. Dora Matzke
  36. Marcus R Munafò
  37. Ben R Newell
  38. Brian A Nosek
  39. Russell A Poldrack
  40. Don van Ravenzwaaij
  41. Jörg Rieskamp
  42. Matthew J Salganik
  43. Alexandra Sarafoglou
  44. Tom Schonberg
  45. Martin Schweinsberg
  46. David Shanks
  47. Raphael Silberzahn
  48. Daniel J Simons
  49. Barbara A Spellman
  50. Samuel St-Jean
  51. Jeffrey J Starns
  52. Eric Luis Uhlmann
  53. Jelte Wicherts
  54. Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
(2021)
Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies
eLife 10:e72185.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72185
  1. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Medicine
    2. Physics of Living Systems
    Anand O Masson, Bryce Besler ... Roman J Krawetz
    Research Article

    Characterizing the biomechanical properties of articular cartilage is crucial to understanding processes of tissue homeostasis vs. degeneration. In mouse models, however, limitations are imposed by their small joint size and thin cartilage surfaces. Here we present a 3D automated surface mapping system and methodology that allows for mechanical characterization of mouse cartilage with high spatial resolution. We performed repeated indentation mappings, followed by cartilage thickness measurement via needle probing, at 31 predefined positions distributed over the medial and lateral femoral condyles of healthy mice. High-resolution 3D x-ray microscopy (XRM) imaging was used to validate tissue thickness measurements. The automated indentation mapping was reproducible, and needle probing yielded cartilage thicknesses comparable to XRM imaging. When comparing healthy vs. degenerated cartilage, topographical variations in biomechanics were identified, with altered thickness and stiffness (instantaneous modulus) across condyles and within anteroposterior sub-regions. This quantitative technique comprehensively characterized cartilage function in mice femoral condyle cartilage. Hence, it has the potential to improve our understanding of tissue structure-function interplay in mouse models of repair and disease.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Medicine
    Huan-Huan Chen, Tie-Ning Zhang ... Tao Zhang
    Research Article Updated

    Background:

    Sarcomas comprise approximately 1% of all human malignancies; treatment resistance is one of the major reasons for the poor prognosis of sarcomas. Accumulating evidence suggests that non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), including miRNAs, long ncRNAs, and circular RNAs, are important molecules involved in the crosstalk between resistance to chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and radiotherapy via various pathways.

    Methods:

    We searched the PubMed (MEDLINE) database for articles regarding sarcoma-associated ncRNAs from inception to August 17, 2022. Studies investigating the roles of host-derived miRNAs, long ncRNAs, and circular RNAs in sarcoma were included. Data relating to the roles of ncRNAs in therapeutic regulation and their applicability as biomarkers for predicting the therapeutic response of sarcomas were extracted. Two independent researchers assessed the quality of the studies using the Würzburg Methodological Quality Score (W-MeQS).

    Results:

    Observational studies revealed the ectopic expression of ncRNAs in sarcoma patients who had different responses to antitumor treatments. Experimental studies have confirmed crosstalk between cellular pathways pertinent to chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and radiotherapy resistance. Of the included studies, W-MeQS scores ranged from 3 to 10 (average score = 5.42). Of the 12 articles that investigated ncRNAs as biomarkers, none included a validation cohort. Selective reporting of the sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating curves was common.

    Conclusions:

    Although ncRNAs appear to be good candidates as biomarkers for predicting treatment response and therapeutics for sarcoma, their differential expression across tissues complicates their application. Further research regarding their potential for inhibiting or activating these regulatory molecules to reverse treatment resistance may be useful.

    Funding:

    This study’s literature retrieval was supported financially by the 345 Talent Project of Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University (M0949 to Tao Zhang).