The biomedical sciences rarely provide full protocol, data, and necessary level of transparency to verify or replicate studies, according to an analysis of papers published between 2000 and 2014 to determine the extent researchers report key information necessary for properly evaluating and replicating published research, including availability of protocols, data, and the frequency of published novel or replication studies.
The results: 1 out of 441 articles drawn from across the biomedical literature provided a full protocol and no paper made all the data available. The majority of studies didn't state funding or conflicts of interest and replication studies were very rare.