Rigor and Reproducibility in Analysis of Vascular Calcification

Abstract

Summary Abstract Clinical and pre-clinical studies of cardiovascular calcification often require interpretation of images from histopathology, CT scans, intravascular ultrasound, and positron emission tomography. To avoid potential pitfalls in biological inferences, investigators should know what happens to data in image processing algorithms, the limitations of cross-sectional images in studying mechanostability, and how smoothing algorithms can mask partial-volume artifacts in PET images.

Is Matrix Gla Protein Associated with Vascular Calcification? A Systematic Review

“…The in vivo calcification measurements were predominantly acquired from CT based imaging and scored by the Agatston method. The ubiquitous use of semi-quantitative metrics, including the Agatston scoring method, should be used with caution when interpreting the level of calcification present, as such a scoring approach is very sensitive to overestimating the calcification burden due to a false high score [ 57 ]. It has also been previously demonstrated that the clinical CT resolution constraints partially impede accurate measurements of calcification and delineation from surrounding diseased tissue [ 58 ].…”

New Initiatives to Improve the Rigor and Reproducibility of Articles Published in Circulation Research

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] It is a veritable plague that undermines the credibility of published studies, hinders clinical translation of basic work, and impedes the progress of medicine. Disquietingly, the problem seems to be getting worse rather than better.…”

“…It is not the purpose of this editorial to revisit the nature, origins, mechanisms, and consequences of irreproducibility, all of which have been discussed innumerable times in recent years, both in the literature and in ad hoc workshops. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] There has been enough discussion; now it is time for action.…”

“…It is for this reason that Circulation Research has published several reviews, editorials, Viewpoints, and News & Views articles focused on this issue. 1,2,[7][8][9][10][11][12] It is for this reason that the journal has joined other leading journals to promote reproducibility of biomedical research 4 by endorsing the National Institutes of Health principles and guidelines for reporting preclinical research, 6 and it is for this very reason that we have recently chosen to publish a study showing that only a minority of preclinical animal experiments reported in leading cardiovascular journals (including Circulation Research) adheres to basic criteria necessary to assure rigor: for example, it was found that during a 10-year span, blinding was reported in 33% of the articles examined, randomization in 22%, and a priori sample size calculation in 2%. 7 The most troubling aspect of this report is that, with the exception of stroke research, there has been no improvement in the level of rigor in the past decade.…”

Paul Simpson and Scientific Rigor

“…4 Science that cannot be reproduced is not really science. At a time when many or even most papers published in the literature have been found to be irreproducible, [5][6][7][8] we are proud that Circulation Research is a leader in demanding adherence to methods that are rigorous, transparent, and reproducible, thereby setting standards that are as high as, or higher than, those of any other journal 4 (for detailed information on the rigor and transparency criteria used by Circulation Research, please see the checklists that authors must complete; these can be found in the initial editorial announcing these initiatives available at https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/ CIRCRESAHA.117.311678). Readers should know that all papers published in Circulation Research are now thoroughly vetted for rigor and transparency not only by the reviewers and the handling editors, but also by our Editor for Compliance with Rigor Guidelines, Dr Joseph Moore, whom I have added to the editorial team specifically to insure maximal rigor and transparency in our content.…”