Research practice
Defining the scope of research image review
Separate format checks, provenance, automated flags and expert judgment.
Break image review into specific questions
Dimensions, resolution, labels, provenance, editing steps and content interpretation are different kinds of checks. List the actual questions and criteria before choosing tools or a human review process.
Preserve originals and editing records
Original files, processing steps and versions help a reviewer understand how a final figure was produced. The relationship between a presentation image and original data provides more information than an exported image alone.
Separate flags from conclusions
A tool may highlight areas for further inspection. Meaning depends on its method, input quality and thresholds. A flag does not establish misconduct, and the absence of flags does not establish the absence of problems.
Use the applicable requirements
Consult the target journal’s current image requirements before submission and have the research team determine which apply. A generic checklist cannot replace specific requirements.
RIBLAB is currently exploring needs in this area. This website offers no online image detection or research file uploads. Checks, reports and human review must be scoped after feasibility discussions.