{rfName}
A

Indexed in

License and use

Icono OpenAccess

Citations

10

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Giraldo OCorresponding AuthorCorcho OAuthor

Share

Publications
>
Article

A guideline for reporting experimental protocols in life sciences

Publicated to:Peerj. 2018 (5): e4795- - 2018-05-28 2018(5), DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4795

Authors: Giraldo, Olga; Garcia, Alexander; Corcho, Oscar

Affiliations

Graz Univ Technol, Graz, Austria - Author
Technische Universitat Graz - Author
Univ Politecn Madrid, Ontol Engn Grp, Campus Montegancedo, Madrid, Spain - Author
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid - Author

Abstract

© 2018 Giraldo et al. Experimental protocols are key when planning, performing and publishing research in many disciplines, especially in relation to the reporting of materials and methods. However, they vary in their content, structure and associated data elements. This article presents a guideline for describing key content for reporting experimental protocols in the domain of life sciences, together with the methodology followed in order to develop such guideline. As part of our work, we propose a checklist that contains 17 data elements that we consider fundamental to facilitate the execution of the protocol. These data elements are formally described in the SMART Protocols ontology. By providing guidance for the key content to be reported, we aim (1) to make it easier for authors to report experimental protocols with necessary and sufficient information that allow others to reproduce an experiment, (2) to promote consistency across laboratories by delivering an adaptable set of data elements, and (3) to make it easier for reviewers and editors to measure the quality of submitted manuscripts against an established criteria. Our checklist focuses on the content, what should be included. Rather than advocating a specific format for protocols in life sciences, the checklist includes a full description of the key data elements that facilitate the execution of the protocol.

Keywords

checklistexperimental protocolsgood practices for reporting protocolsguidelinesopen sciencerecommendationsBiomedical protocolsCellsChecklistDatabaseExperimental protocolsExtractionGood practices for reporting protocolsGuidelinesMinimum informationOntologyOpen scienceRecommendationsReproducibilitySemanticsTissuesYeast

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal Peerj due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency Scopus (SJR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2018, it was in position , thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Agricultural and Biological Sciences (Miscellaneous).

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from the Field Citation Ratio (FCR) of the Dimensions source, it yields a value of: 2.23, which indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: Dimensions Jun 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-06-30, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 4
  • Scopus: 6

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-06-30:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 72.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 72 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 27.35.
  • The number of mentions on the social network Facebook: 1 (Altmetric).
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 27 (Altmetric).

It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

  • The work has been submitted to a journal whose editorial policy allows open Open Access publication.

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

This work has been carried out with international collaboration, specifically with researchers from: Austria.

There is a significant leadership presence as some of the institution’s authors appear as the first or last signer, detailed as follows: First Author (GIRALDO PASMIN, OLGA XIMENA) and Last Author (CORCHO GARCIA, OSCAR).

the author responsible for correspondence tasks has been GIRALDO PASMIN, OLGA XIMENA.