Post

... and that's where Registered Revisions comes in The Registered Revisions Meta Trial Pilot Report is OUT NOW!! osf.io/preprints/me... But new(ish) policy involves developing a new(ish) multi-headed trial design, workflows, infrastructure, piloting, mistakes, and a super team. And it's all here.

This report is a little different than what you might be used to. You won't see results or implications (due next year). This is a deep dive into the design and development of the policy, methods, ideas, etc. And most importantly, what didn't go to plan. Which was a lot. bsky.app/profile/whal...

Registered Revisions is like a mini registered report for when reviewers/editors imply some new analysis or data collection be performed during standard peer review. It's what @dingdingpeng.the100.ci describes here, but lightly formalized and with developed workflows bsky.app/profile/ding...

<record scratch> "You may be wondering how we got here". That's Part 1, and it starts with a curveball (no spoilers). Nearly everything in this project was developed by necessity (sometimes unexpected), from the policy itself to the meta trial design to the (non-obvious) outcomes selection.

Part 2: the Pilot, with a crew of kickass journal editors and co designers. Unlike standard pilots confirming or adjusting a well-developed trial, we needed to build this plane as we were flying it. The "pathfinder" pilot was more co-development than test implementation. Everyone pitched in a TON.

How about workflows and templates for integrating the Registered Revisions policy into standard editorial processes? Yeah we got that. You want infrastructure? You're covered. A whole webapp based system for participant management and tracking designed to work with normal editorial touchpoints.