Reforms to improve reproducibility and quality must be coordinated across the research ecosystem: the view from the UKRN Local Network Leads

Suzanne L K Stewart, Charlotte R Pennington, Gonçalo R da Silva, Nick Ballou, Jessica Butler, Zoltan Dienes, Caroline Jay, Stephanie Rossit, Anna Samara, U. K. Reproducibility Network (UKRN) Local Network Leads

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)
3 Downloads (Pure)


Many disciplines are facing a "reproducibility crisis", which has precipitated much discussion about how to improve research integrity, reproducibility, and transparency. A unified effort across all sectors, levels, and stages of the research ecosystem is needed to coordinate goals and reforms that focus on open and transparent research practices. Promoting a more positive incentive culture for all ecosystem members is also paramount. In this commentary, we-the Local Network Leads of the UK Reproducibility Network-outline our response to the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee's inquiry on research integrity and reproducibility. We argue that coordinated change is needed to create (1) a positive research culture, (2) a unified stance on improving research quality, (3) common foundations for open and transparent research practice, and (4) the routinisation of this practice. For each of these areas, we outline the roles that individuals, institutions, funders, publishers, and Government can play in shaping the research ecosystem. Working together, these constituent members must also partner with sectoral and coordinating organisations to produce effective and long-lasting reforms that are fit-for-purpose and future-proof. These efforts will strengthen research quality and create research capable of generating far-reaching applications with a sustained impact on society.

Original languageEnglish
Article number58
Number of pages5
JournalBMC Research Notes
Publication statusPublished - 15 Feb 2022

Bibliographical note

UKRN: UK Reproducibility Network; OaTR: Open and transparent research.
We would like to thank Marcus Munafò for his feedback on this commentary.
Authors’ contributions
SLKS and CRP were primarily responsible for drafting the work, with SLKS
having primary oversight. SLKS, CRP, GRdS, NB, JB, ZD, CJ, SR, and AS made
substantial contributions to the conception and writing of this work. SLKS,
CRP, GRdS, NB, JB, and AS revised this work. SLKS, CRP, GRdS, NB, JB, ZD, CJ,
SR, and AS have approved the fnal revised and submitted version and have
agreed both to be personally accountable for the author’s own contributions
and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part
of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are
appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the
literature. All authors have read and approved the fnal manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

Availability of data and materials
This manuscript is associated with a response from the UKRN Local Network
Leads to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee Inquiry
on Reproducibility and Research Integrity.


  • Ecosystem
  • Government
  • Humans
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Science and Technology Committee
  • Integrity
  • Reproducibility
  • Transparency
  • Open research
  • Open scholarship
  • Research infrastructure
  • UK Reproducibility Network


Dive into the research topics of 'Reforms to improve reproducibility and quality must be coordinated across the research ecosystem: the view from the UKRN Local Network Leads'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this