Talk:EQIPD Quality System
On this page we can collect ideas and errors within the entire Wiki.
Contents
New pages needed
- Sex differences in animal research
Errors on the pages
https://www.eda.nc3rs.org.uk/ - link doesn't work
Dedicated working groups
General
- Checking incorrect items:
- Sara: Section 2
- Leo / Björn: Section 1
- To clarify: Does the mission statement and the template still make sense? E.g. is it useful? https://paasp.sharepoint.com/:w:/s/EQIPD/EVUTrgQRuNpKtpHkobdCOq4BhSTw1p3akXGKvI_MRgxYag?e=U3bWIn
- Any thoughts for resources for the page 1.3.1 Transparency
- Error
- René: Section 3
- Checking missing pages
- Everyone when screening though the website, with René as a contact
- Find mechanisms to keep it up-to-date
- Tbd
Specific task forces formed already:
- Quality culture and improvmenent
- Arnoud, Sandrine, Jonathan. We'll rewrite this section and blend quality culture with continuous improvement. This because continuous improvement is a key element of a mature quality culture
- Antibodies and validation
- Harv, Marija
- Creating page on sex differences
- Christina, Vootele
Orphans-Do not link to any other EQIPD pages:
1.4.3.2 Quality in collaborative research - https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/1.4.3.2_Quality_in_collaborative_research
EQIPD - https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/EQIPD
EQIPD for Core Facilities - https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/EQIPD_for_Core_Facilities
Examples of implementing a unique study ID - https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/Examples_of_implementing_a_unique_study_ID
Experimental Record - https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/Experimental_Record
Hauptseite - https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/Hauptseite
Performance Standards - https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/Performance_Standards
Spot checks - https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/Spot_checks
Why quality matters - https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/Why_quality_matters
Glossary: might need extension
SABV
FAIR (data)
Pages needed
- Questionable Research Practices
- CoARA process, research evaluation
- protocols (reusable, reproducible, management)
- AI in research quality?
- feature Marten Kas as EQIPD use case examples
- data (format) community standards
- FAIR data, data repositories, DMP
- more reporting guidelines/recommendations, like RIVER (not just minimum standards)
Pages with "to be added sections"
(needs priorisation before adding content)
1.3.1 Transparency
1.3.3 Promotion criteria within a research unit
1.4.1 Research ethics
1.4.2 Adherence to legal and regulatory considerations
1.4.2.7 Animal care and use
1.4.2.8 Human data protection
1.4.3.4 Academia-academia: Research as collaboration
1.5.2 Roles and responsibilities of involved personnel and organization
1.5.2.1 Organigram
1.5.2.2 Management
1.5.2.4 Principal investigators and study directors
1.5.2.5 Research team
1.5.2.6 Supporting team
1.5.2.7 Quality professionals
1.5.3 Management of resources
1.5.3.1 Personnel
1.5.3.2 Facilities
1.5.3.3 Laboratory and experimental equipment used for measurement
1.5.3.4 Electronic information system
1.5.3.5 Organization-specific know how
1.5.3.6 Documentation requirement for sample and material
1.5.3.7 Retained personnel records
1.5.4.1 Independence of internal compliance assessment
1.5.4.2 Internal assessment of the organizations' quality professionals
1.5.5 Sustainability
2.1.6 Sample size and power analysis
2.1.10 Plausibility check => resource: e.g. arrive guidelines + link with risk analysis?
2.2.2 Use of template for (manual) data recording
2.3.1.1 Converting non-electronic information into an electronic form
2.3.2 Primary analysis and evaluation of raw data
2.4 Reporting
2.4.1 Non-public reporting
3.2.1 General guidance on training
3.5.1 Animal and non-animal method and assay qualification
4.1.3 External assessment
4.2.1 Installation of solutions, actions and mitigation strategies
4.3.1.2 Deleting items
Dead links
2.1.11 Preregistration: https://openscience.bmj.com/
training resources needed to be embedded
https://go-eqipd.org/about-eqipd/webinar-2023/
https://go-eqipd.org/resources/eqipd-e-learning/
https://research.columbia.edu/ReaDI-program
find more more online templates
proof reading
- 2.1.11 Preregistration: example on timeline would be useful (to convince people to do it)
- 2.1.1: 2 pages with same content but different name: study protocol; study experimental plan
- 2.1 Plausibility check - suggestion for resource: ARRIVE Guidelines 2.0; text that can be used: Although the term plausibility check is not explicitly mentioned in the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines, several of its key items promote similar quality practices. For example, sections on Study Design, Statistical Methods, and Interpretation encourage researchers to justify their choices, report results in context, and ensure that analyses are appropriate. These align closely with the goals of a plausibility check—namely, verifying whether assumptions, methods, and outcomes are biologically and methodologically credible.
2.2.3 Documentation of the experiment and deviations - link to 3.1.2.2 doesn't work; link to study protocol doesn't work
1.3.2 [LR] Section A should be rearranged so to have the last sentence as the top of the page, the first sentence is a repetition from the previous page, we could delete it. We could also add more recent resources (for example: https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/140/2/1111/7997678)
1.3.3 [LR] The sentence it is often repeated in each section, at the beginning of the paragraph. I would rather place it at the end of the paragraph to improve the readability of the text. Also, following up on the comment from Sara, it would be nice to have a dedicated section in each page that links to the core requirements or other elements of the Quality System. in this case under this section we could write the sentence: "EQIPD does not expect any formal documents or analyses to be conducted."
1.3.5 [LR] Here is a list of proposed changes: [1] change "highly desirable" to "strongly recommended" [2] use bold font for key terms/ actions. this would help to skim through the text [3] the whole page could be framed as a flow-chart using the same text, but structured in a different way. This would improve readability and usability of the page [4] include the part about negative results in the list of key questions [5] include a subsection (or paragraph title) for the list of questions ("key questions to consider")
3.4.1.2 [LR] Fix typos throughout the text and re-phrase the "do not forget" section.
3.4.1.3 [LR] Background & Definition: Reduce redundant info. guidance & expectations use bold font for key term must.
3.4.1.4 [LR] Should we merge this section with the previous one? (i.e. merge animal environment with housing conditions). This would align the toolbox to other resources such as PREPARE and NC3Rs. In addition, we can include the link to the PREPARE section on housing and husbandry (https://norecopa.no/prepare/12-housing-and-husbandry/12a/general-principles/)
3.4.1.5 [LR] typos to fix. please do not forget section: add "bedding type".
overall to do's
- proof reading sections: look for errors, outdated information, broken links, plausibility?
- QUALITY (evaluation) aspects (criteria, checks, checklists, how-to) should be in focus and a priority..to generate products and data with secured high quality
- [LR] It would be good to leverage some of of Wikimedia's structures (semantic tagging, infoboxes, ...) to improve the "machine readability" of the whole resource.
