Difference between pages "Core Requirements" and "1.4.3.5 Expectations from public funders"

From EQIPD
(Difference between pages)
Jump to: navigation, search
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{| class="wikitable"
+
=Background and Expectations=
|'''Categories​​​'''
 
|'''No'''
 
|'''Item'''
 
|​'''Toolbox item'''
 
|-
 
|rowspan="2"|'''Research team'''​
 
|1
 
|Process owner must be identified for the Quality System
 
|[[1.5.2.3 Process owner|1.5.2.3]]​
 
|-
 
|2
 
|Communication process must be in place
 
|1.2
 
|-
 
|rowspan="3"|'''Quality culture'''
 
|3
 
|The research unit must have defined quality objectives ​
 
|1.1
 
|-
 
|4
 
|All activities must comply with relevant legislation and policies
 
|1.4.2
 
|-
 
|5
 
|The research unit must have a procedure to act upon concerns of potential misconduct
 
|4.2.3​
 
|-
 
|rowspan="4"|​​'''Data integrity'''
 
|6
 
|Generation, handling and changes to data records must be documented
 
|​2.3.1​
 
|-
 
|7
 
|Data storage must be secured at least for as long as required by legal, contractual or other obligations or business needs
 
|3.1.3
 
|-
 
|8
 
|Reported research outcomes must be traceable to experimental data
 
|3.1.2.1
 
|-
 
|9
 
|Reported data must disclose all repetitions of a study, an experiment, or a test regardless of the outcome​​
 
|2.4
 
|-
 
|rowspan="5"|​​​'''Research processes'''
 
|10
 
|Investigator must declare in advance whether a study is intended to inform a formal knowledge claim
 
|​2.1.4
 
|-
 
|11
 
|All personnel involved in research must have adequate training and competence to perform assigned tasks
 
|3.2.1
 
|-
 
|12
 
|Protocols for experimental methods must be available
 
|3.5.2
 
|-
 
|13
 
|Adequate handling and storage of samples and materials must be ensured
 
|3.3.3
 
|-
 
|14
 
|Research equipment and tools must be suitable for intended use and ensure data integrity
 
|3.3.2
 
|-
 
|rowspan="3"|'''Continuous performance'''
 
|15
 
|Risk assessment must be performed to identify factors affecting the generation, processing and reporting of research data
 
|4.1.1
 
|-
 
|16
 
|Critical incidents and errors during study conduct must be analyzed and appropriately managed
 
|4.2.2
 
|-
 
|17
 
|An approach must be in place to monitor the performance of the EQIPD Quality System, and address identified issues​
 
|4.1.2
 
|-
 
|'''Sustainability'''
 
|18
 
|Resources for sustaining the EQIPD Quality System must be available
 
|1.5.5​​
 
|}
 
  
Back to the [[EQIPD Quality System]]​.​​​​
+
EQIPD has developed a tool to support:
 +
* funders willing to communicate their expectations about data management and rigor in study design, conduct, analysis, and reporting
 +
* scientists applying for funding and willing to follow best practices in research rigor
 +
 
 +
For funders:
 +
* it is expected that the tool is made freely available (e.g. as a link) on the website informing applicants about the scope of the tool
 +
* the tool provides generic expectations formulated by the EQIPD working group and can be further extended by guidance and other information specific to a funding body
 +
* it is expected that different funding bodies will decide as to whether:
 +
** the use of this tool is mandatory or not
 +
** whether a report generated by the tool should be made part of the application for funding
 +
** whether any additional information or evidence should be provided to support answers collected by the tool
 +
 
 +
For scientists applying for funding:
 +
* the primary use of the tool is to help scientists identify potential gaps in the current practices
 +
* even if the use of the tool is not mandated by the funder, applicants may nevertheless want to add the report generated by the tool to the submission package in order to emphasize the adherence to the research practice expectations formulated by EQIPD
 +
 
 +
The tool creates a "snapshot" of the environment in which research is conducted and provides scientists/organizations with the opportunity to demonstrate to funders in a structured (comparable) way that they are aware of critical quality measures/requirements and that they have implemented (most of) these in their environment.
 +
 
 +
It ensures that funders and applicants can align on relevant quality expectations (based on the EQIPD framework) and that all parties involved speak the “same language”.
 +
 
 +
This tool is NOT supposed to guide scientists how to design and conduct specific experiments.
 +
 
 +
=Resources=
 +
 
 +
* [https://paasp.sharepoint.com/:x:/s/EQIPD/ESCLBokAH8ZIuDcre3q5pp0BlN3IzHfYVr8clB9_UbT13w?e=48hlRK Excel-based tool] (The tool can be downloaded from the Online-Excel via the tab “File” in the menu, click on “Save as” and click on "Download a copy")
 +
* [https://public-funding-tool.paasp.net/survey Research Quality Transparency Tool] (Online version)
 +
 
 +
 
 +
----------------
 +
back to [[Toolbox]]
 +
 
 +
Next item: [[1.5.1 Quality policy]]​

Latest revision as of 14:13, 2 February 2023

Background and Expectations

EQIPD has developed a tool to support:

  • funders willing to communicate their expectations about data management and rigor in study design, conduct, analysis, and reporting
  • scientists applying for funding and willing to follow best practices in research rigor

For funders:

  • it is expected that the tool is made freely available (e.g. as a link) on the website informing applicants about the scope of the tool
  • the tool provides generic expectations formulated by the EQIPD working group and can be further extended by guidance and other information specific to a funding body
  • it is expected that different funding bodies will decide as to whether:
    • the use of this tool is mandatory or not
    • whether a report generated by the tool should be made part of the application for funding
    • whether any additional information or evidence should be provided to support answers collected by the tool

For scientists applying for funding:

  • the primary use of the tool is to help scientists identify potential gaps in the current practices
  • even if the use of the tool is not mandated by the funder, applicants may nevertheless want to add the report generated by the tool to the submission package in order to emphasize the adherence to the research practice expectations formulated by EQIPD

The tool creates a "snapshot" of the environment in which research is conducted and provides scientists/organizations with the opportunity to demonstrate to funders in a structured (comparable) way that they are aware of critical quality measures/requirements and that they have implemented (most of) these in their environment.

It ensures that funders and applicants can align on relevant quality expectations (based on the EQIPD framework) and that all parties involved speak the “same language”.

This tool is NOT supposed to guide scientists how to design and conduct specific experiments.

Resources



back to Toolbox

Next item: 1.5.1 Quality policy