Objectives: To systematically evaluate timely reporting of clinical trial results at medical universities and university hospitals in the Nordic countries. Study Design and Setting: In this cross-sectional study, we included trials (regardless of intervention) registered in the European Union (EU) Clinical Trials Registry and/or ClinicalTrials.gov, completed 2016-2019 and led by a university with medical faculty or university hospital in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, or Sweden. We identified summary results posted at the trial registries and conducted systematic manual searches for results publications (eg, journal articles, preprints). We present proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and medians with interquartile range (IQR). Protocol: https://osf.io/wua3r. Results: Among 2112 included clinical trials, 1650 (78.1%, 95% CI 76.3%-79.8%) reported any results during our follow-up; 1097 (51.9%, 95% CI 49.8%-54.1%) reported any results within 2 years of the global completion date; and 48 (2.3%, 95% CI 1.7%-3.0%) posted summary results in the registry within 1 year. The median time from global completion date to results reporting was 690 days (IQR 1103). 856/1681 (50.9%) of ClinicalTrials.gov registrations were prospective. Denmark contributed approximately half of all trials. Reporting performance varied widely between institutions. Conclusion: Missing and delayed results reporting of academically led clinical trials are a pervasive problem in the Nordic countries. We relied on trial registry information, which can be incomplete. Institutions, funders, and policymakers need to support trial teams, ensure regulation adherence, and secure trial reporting before results are permanently lost. (c) 2025 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Vetenskapliga tidskrifter som gömmer sina forskningsresultat bakom betalväggar har spelat ut sin roll. Nu har vi chansen att få 500 miljoner mer till forskning – bara genom att säga nej till tidskrifterna, skriver debattörer.

Science is often perceived to be a self-correcting enterprise. In principle, the assessment of scientific claims is supposed to proceed in a cumulative fashion, with the reigning theories of the day progressively approximating truth more accurately over time. In practice, however, cumulative self-correction tends to proceed less efficiently than one might naively suppose. Far from evaluating new evidence dispassionately and infallibly, individual scientists often cling stubbornly to prior findings. Here we explore the dynamics of scientific self-correction at an individual rather than collective level. In 13 written statements, researchers from diverse branches of psychology share why and how they have lost confidence in one of their own published findings. We qualitatively characterize these disclosures and explore their implications. A cross-disciplinary survey suggests that such loss-of-confidence sentiments are surprisingly common among members of the broader scientific population yet rarely become part of the public record. We argue that removing barriers to self-correction at the individual level is imperative if the scientific community as a whole is to achieve the ideal of efficient self-correction.

Uppmärksamheten kring tvivelaktig forskning har lett till ökade krav på transparens genom hela forskningsprocessen. Psykologin har tagit ledningen för att genomdriva förändringar, skriver forskarna Rebecca Willén och Gustav Nilsonne, som ger en introduktion till öppen vetenskap (open science) och sammanfattar de främsta kraven som nu börjat ställas på vetenskaplig kvalitet.

Amount and quality of detail in recollections of past events are often studied in legal psychology. What, how much, and how accurate does a witness typically recall? How can we facilitate witnesses' recollections in police interviews? How can we detect deception? The overall aim of this thesis was to employ research with high ecological validity to investigate amount and quality of detail in interviews with cooperative adults. Study I investigated details in true and false confessions by 30 cooperative offenders in a within-subject experiment. The confessions concerned one crime the respondent had conducted and been sentenced for (true confession) and one crime the respondent had never conducted nor been sentenced for (false confession). Studies II and III investigated details in interviews with 95 cooperative adults about repeated dental visits. Study II was an experiment employing a within-subject design to investigate the effect of context-specific cues on recollection of repeated events. Study III further studied the data by investigating how five factors (interviewee age, rehearsal, interviewer, number of experienced events, and unpleasantness) affected two different measures of amount and quality of detail. Study IV made all data from Studies II and III, supplemented with a codebook, freely available in an online repository. Surprisingly, Study I showed very few differences in amount and quality of detail between offenders' true and false confessions. However, three detail measures could distinguish the true and false statements, which is promising for future research on offenders' statements. Results from Study II suggested that context-specific cues may generate more details about repeated events than cues commonly used in police interviews. Thus, mnemonics such as context-specific cues may, in the future, be a positive addition to current mnemonic techniques employed in legal practice. Study III showed that the two different detail measures were affected differently by all five factors (e.g., who conducted the interview did have an affect on one of the two measures but had no effect on the second measure). The results highlight the need for standardization of how we measure amount and quality of detail in research on investigative interviewing. The data from Studies II and III can be reused as data from an experiment (including both interviews, as in Study II) or as single interview data (including data only from Interview I, as in Study III). The data and material can be used for research and educational purposes. This thesis contributes to the ongoing methodological revolution in psychology by practicing transparent reporting, publishing the data for Studies II and III, and by raising the problem of using non-standardized procedures and measures in research on investigative interviewing.

Memory for repeated events is relevant to legal investigations about repeated occurrences. We investigated how two measures of specificity (number of events referred to and amount of detail reported about the events) were influenced by interviewees' age, number of experienced events, interviewer, perceived unpleasantness, and memory rehearsal. Transcribed narratives consisting of over 40.000 utterances from 95 dental patients, and the corresponding dental records, were studied. Amount of detail was measured by categorizing the utterances as generic, specific, or specific-extended. We found that the two measures were affected differently by all five factors. For instance, number of experienced events positively influenced number of referred events but had no effect on amount of detail provided about the events. We make suggestions for future research and encourage reanalysis of the present data set and reuse of the material.

Öppna data från kliniska prövningar och andra studier gör det möjligt att utvinna mer kunskap, minskar risken för snedvridning (bias) och kan motverka fusk.

Krav på öppna data ställs nu av EU liksom av flera forskningsfinansiärer och vetenskapliga tidskrifter.

Meritsättning av öppna data är en delvis olöst utmaning.

In 2012, Swedish dental care patients (n = 95) participated in a quasi-experiment in which they were interviewed twice about dental visits they had made between 2002 and 2012. For verification purposes, the participants' narratives were compared to the dental records. The qualitative data was quantified, stored as a .csv file, and supplemented with a codebook in plain text. All study materials are freely available online. The data can be reused to further analyse memory for repeated events. The data can be used both as data from an experiment (including both interviews) and as single interview data (including data only from the first interview, i.e., before the respondents were provided with memory cues).

Survey based research about self-reported incidents and legal investigations concerning sexual abuse, terrorism, and refugee status determination often involves reporting about self-experienced events that are similar to each other and has occurred repeatedly. Such repeated events tend to be recalled in a general manner and as a cluster of events. It can therefore be difficult for a respondent or witness to specify which individual episode a particular detail belongs to and to describe the individual episodes in detail. The overall aims of the present thesis were to investigate whether peoples’ memories of repeated events can be improved by mnemonics and how memory specificity should be measured. Two studies were conducted and both were based on interviews with 95 dental care patients about all dental visits they had made during the past ten years. Objective truth was established by analysing their dental records. Both studies employed two measures of memory specificity (number of individual events recalled and recalled amount of details about the events). Amount of details was measured by categorising the respondents’ utterances as generic, specific, or specific-extended in line with established coding procedures for measuring overgeneral memory. Study I investigated the effect of context-specific cues on peoples’ ability to remember individual events and details about the events. The main results showed that context-specific cues tended to be more effective for recollection of individual events than cues commonly used in legal practice. The context-specific cues did also generate somewhat more details than the comparison cues. The results imply that recollection of repeated events can be enhanced by mnemonics such as context-specific cues. Study II showed that the two measures of memory specificity (i.e., number of individual events recalled and recalled amount of details about the events) were influenced differently by all five investigated factors (interviewees’ age, number of experienced events, interviewer, perceived unpleasantness concerning the events, and how much the interviewee had rehearsed their memories). For instance, number of experienced events positively influenced the number of events recalled but had no effect on the amount of details. It was additionally found that the respondents often underestimated how many visits they had made. An important implication of the study is that future research should make clear distinctions between the two types of memory specificity. In sum, the studies suggest that mnemonics can aid recollection of repeated events, although the research on the subject has methodological issues that need to be resolved.