Skip Navigation



American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access published online on March 1, 2006
American Journal of Epidemiology, doi:10.1093/aje/kwj093
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
163/9/783    most recent
kwj093v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Peng, R. D.
Right arrow Articles by Zeger, S. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Peng, R. D.
Right arrow Articles by Zeger, S. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Copyright © 2006 by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health All rights reserved; printed in U.S.A.
Received November 4, 2005
Accepted January 10, 2006

COMMENTARY

Reproducible Epidemiologic Research

Roger D. Peng 1 *, Francesca Dominici 1, and Scott L. Zeger 1

1 From the Biostatistics Department, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Roger D. Peng, E-mail: rpeng{at}jhsph.edu


  Abstract

The replication of important findings by multiple independent investigators is fundamental to the accumulation of scientific evidence. Researchers in the biologic and physical sciences expect results to be replicated by independent data, analytical methods, laboratories, and instruments. Epidemiologic studies are commonly used to quantify small health effects of important, but subtle, risk factors, and replication is of critical importance where results can inform substantial policy decisions. However, because of the time, expense, and opportunism of many current epidemiologic studies, it is often impossible to fully replicate their findings. An attainable minimum standard is "reproducibility," which calls for data sets and software to be made available for verifying published findings and conducting alternative analyses. The authors outline a standard for reproducibility and evaluate the reproducibility of current epidemiologic research. They also propose methods for reproducible research and implement them by use of a case study in air pollution and health.

Keywords: air pollution; information dissemination; models, statistical.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Sociological Methods ResearchHome page
J. Freese
Replication Standards for Quantitative Social Science: Why Not Sociology?
Sociological Methods Research, November 1, 2007; 36(2): 153 - 172.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
F. Dominici, R. D. Peng, S. L. Zeger, R. H. White, and J. M. Samet
Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality in the United States: Did the Risks Change from 1987 to 2000?
Am. J. Epidemiol., October 15, 2007; 166(8): 880 - 888.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
C. Laine, S. N. Goodman, M. E. Griswold, and H. C. Sox
Reproducible Research: Moving toward Research the Public Can Really Trust
Ann Intern Med, March 20, 2007; 146(6): 450 - 453.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.