Digitalni repozitorijum
Univerziteta u Beogradu
{{ mc.sd.lang | uppercase }}
Good scientific practice in EEG and MEG research: Progress and perspectives
Шошкић, Анђела
Abstract: Good scientific practice (GSP) refers to both explicit and implicit rules, recommendations, and guidelines that help scientists to produce work that is of the highest quality at any given time, and to efficiently share that work with the community for further scrutiny or utilization. For experimental research using magneto- and electroencephalography (MEEG), GSP includes specific standards and guidelines for technical competence, which are periodically updated and adapted to new findings. However, GSP also needs to be regularly revisited in a broader light. At the LiveMEEG 2020 conference, a reflection on GSP was fostered that included explicitly documented guidelines and technical advances, but also emphasized intangible GSP: a general awareness of personal, organizational, and societal realities and how they can influence MEEG research. This article provides an extensive report on most of the LiveMEEG contributions and new literature, with the additional aim to synthesize ongoing cultural changes in GSP. It first covers GSP with respect to cognitive biases and logical fallacies, pre- registration as a tool to avoid those and other early pitfalls, and a number of resources to enable collaborative and reproducible research as a general approach to minimize misconceptions. Second, it covers GSP with respect to data acquisition, analysis, reporting, and sharing, including new tools and frameworks to support collaborative work. Finally, GSP is considered in light of ethical implications of MEEG research and the resulting responsibility that scientists have to engage with societal challenges. Considering among other things the benefits of peer review and open access at all stages, the need to coordinate larger international projects, the complexity of MEEG subject matter, and today’s prioritization of fairness, privacy, and the environment, we find that current GSP tends to favor collective and cooperative work, for both scientific and for societal reasons. done. However, current guidelines and checklists appear to have limited adoption, as systematic reviews have shown the journal article format is highly prone to errors, ambiguities and omissions of methodological details. This is a problem for transparency in the scientific record, along with reproducibility and metascience. Following lessons learned in the high complexity fields of aviation and surgery, we conclude that new tools are needed to overcome the limitations of written methodology descriptions, and that these tools should be developed through community consultation to ensure that they have the most utility for EEG stakeholders. As a first step in tool development, we present the ARTEM-IS Statement describing what action will be needed to create an Agreed Reporting Template for Electroencephalography Methodology - International Standard (ARTEM-IS), along with ARTEM-IS Design Guidelines for developing tools that use an evidence-based approach to error reduction. We first launched the statement at the LiveMEEG conference in 2020 along with a draft of an ARTEM-IS template for public consultation. Members of the EEG community are invited to join this collective effort to create evidence- based tools that will help make the process of reporting methodology intuitive to complete and foolproof by design
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811922001859?via%3Dihub
engleski
2022
Ovo delo je licencirano pod uslovima licence
Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 - Creative Commons Autorstvo - Nekomercijalno - Bez prerada 4.0 International License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode
Keywords: Magnetoencephalography (MEG) Electroencephalography (EEG) Good scientific practice
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119056