Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

490

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
available at https www.federal register.gov/documents/2018/05/25/
2018-11316/strengthening-transparencyin-regulatory-science-extension-ofcomment-period-and-notice-of-public.
7. U.S. EPA. Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science; Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 85 FR
15396 March 18, 2020 FRL1000472
ORD, available at https www.federal register.gov/documents/2020/03/18/
2020-05012/strengthening-transparencyin-regulatory-science.
8. Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the President, Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, 70 FR 2664
January 14, 2005, available at https
www.federalregister.gov/documents/
2005/01/14/05-769/final-informationquality-bulletin-for-peer-review.
9. U.S. EPA. 2016. Plan to Increase Access to Results of EPA-Funded Scientific Research. EPA/601R16005.
Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available at https
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/
2016-12/documents/epascientific researchtransperancyplan.pdf.
10. U.S. EPA. 2018. Open Government Plan 5.0. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available at https
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/
2018-10/documents/epaopengovplan version5_0final.pdf.
11. Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the President, OMB M1006, Open Government Directive December 8, 2009, available at https
www.whitehouse.gov/sites/
whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/
2010/m10-06.pdf.
12. Office of Science and Technology Policy.
2013. Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies:
Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Scientific Research.
Available at https www.epa.gov/sites/
production/files/2015-01/documents/
ostp_memo_increasing_public_
access.pdf.
13. Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the President, OMB M1923, Phase 1
Implementation of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018Learning Agendas, Personnel, and Planning Guidance July 10, 2019, available at https www.whitehouse.
gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/M-1923.pdf.
14. Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the President, OMB M2012, Phase 4
Implementation of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018Program Evaluation Standards and Practices March 10, 2020, available at https www.whitehouse.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2020/03/M-20-12.pdf.
15. McNutt, M. 2016. Taking up TOP.
Science 352, 1147. Available at https
doi.org/10.1126/science.aag2359.
16. NAS National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019.
Reproducibility and replicability in science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Available at https
www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:19 Jan 05, 2021

Jkt 253001

reproducibility-and-replicability-inscience.
17. Nosek, B.A. et al. 2015. Promoting an open research culture. Science 348, 14221425. Available at https doi.org/
10.1126/science.aab2374.
18. Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the President, OMB M1915, Improving Implementation of the Information Quality Act April 24, 2019, available at https www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2019/04/M-19-15.pdf.
19. Calabrese, E.J. 2019. EPA transparency proposal: Testimony of Edward J.
Calabrese, Ph.D., October 3, 2018. J Cell Commun Signal. 131: 145147. https
doi.org/10.1007%2Fs12079-018-0497-8.
20. Perrone, J. 2014. Secrets are no fun. The Hill. Available at https thehill.com/
blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/
224583-secrets-are-no-fun.
21. U.S. Congress. 2010. Current Science on Public Exposures to Toxic Chemicals:
Hearing before the Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, 111th Congress.
Available at https www.govinfo.gov/
content/pkg/CHRG-111shrg21160/html/
CHRG-111shrg21160.htm.
22. U.S. Congress. 2010. Letter to EPA
Administrator Jackson. Available at https assets.documentcloud.org/
documents/1202768/letter-fromcongress-to-lisa-jackson-on-arsenic.pdf.
23. U.S. Congress. 2011. EPAs IRIS
Program: Evaluating the Science and Process Behind Chemical Risk Assessment: Hearing before the Subcomm. on Oversight & Investigations of the H. Comm. on Science, Space, &
Technology, 112th Cong. Available at https www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/
CHRG-112hhrg67255/html/CHRG112hhrg67255.htm.
24. McNutt, M. 2014. Journals unite for reproducibility. Science 3466210: 679.
Available at https doi.org/10.1126/
science.aaa1724.
25. Munafo, M.R. et al. 2017. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behaviour 10021. Available at https
doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021.
26. NAS National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016.
Principles and obstacles for sharing data from environmental health research:
Workshop summary. Washington, DC:
The National Academies Press. Available at https doi.org/10.17226/21703.
27. U.S. EPAs Science Advisory Board.
2020. Science Advisory Board Consideration of the Scientific and Technical Basis of EPAs Proposed Rule Titled Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science. EPASAB20005.
Available at https yosemite.epa.gov/
sab/sabproduct.nsf/LookupWebProjects CurrentBOARD/2DB3986BB8390
B308525855800630FCB/$File/EPA-SAB20-005.pdf.
28. Alsheikh-Ali, A.A., Qureshi, W., AlMallah, M.H., and Ioannidis, J.P. 2011.
Public availability of published research data in high-impact journals. PloS ONE
6, e24357. Available at https doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0024357.

PO 00000

Frm 00052

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

29. Iqbal, S.A., Wallach, J.D., Khoury, M.J., Schully, S.D., and Ioannidis, J.P. 2016.
Reproducible research practices and transparency across the biomedical literature. PLoS Biol. 14, e1002333.
Available at https doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pbio.1002333.
30. Peterson, E.D. and Rockhold, F.W. 2018.
Finding means to fulfill the societal and academic imperative for open data access and sharing. JAMA Cardiology.
Available at https doi.org/10.1001/
jamacardio.2018.0129.
31. Wicherts, J.M., Borsboom, D., Kats, J. and Molenaar, D. 2006. The poor availability of psychological research data for reanalysis. Am. Psychol. 61, 726728. Available at https doi.org/
10.1037/0003-066x.61.7.726.
32. Christensen, G., Dafoe, A., Miguel, E., Moore, D.A., and Rose, A.K. 2019. A
study of the impact of data sharing on article citations using journal policies as a natural experiment. PLoS ONE 1412:
e0225883. Available at https doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0225883.
33. Vasilevsky, N.A. et al. 2017.
Reproducible and reusable research: Are journal data sharing policies meeting the mark? PeerJ 5:e3208. Available at https
doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3208.
34. Stodden V., Seiler J., and Ma Z. 2018.
An empirical analysis of journal policy effectiveness for computational reproducibility. PNAS 11511: 2584
2589. Available at https doi.org/
10.1073/pnas.1708290115.
35. U.S. EPA. 2002. Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by the Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/260R02008.
Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available at https
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/
2020-02/documents/epa-info-qualityguidelines_pdf_version.pdf.
36. U.S. EPA. 2014. Framework for Human Health Risk Assessment to Inform Decision Making. EPA/100/R14/001.
Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of the Science Advisor, Risk Assessment Forum.
Available at https www.epa.gov/sites/
production/files/2014-12/documents/
hhra-framework-final-2014.pdf.
37. U.S. EPA. 2003. A Summary of General Assessment Factors for Evaluating the Quality of Scientific and Technical Information. EPA 100/B03/001.
Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available at https
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/
2015-01/documents/assess2.pdf.
38. Lewandowsky, S. and Oberauer, K.
2020. Low replicability can support robust and efficient science. Nat Commun 11, 358. https doi.org/
10.1038/s41467-019-14203-0.
39. Mueller-Langer, F., Fecher, B., Harhoff, D., and Wagner, G.G. 2019. Replication studies in economicsHow many and which papers are chosen for replication, and why? Research Policy 48: 6283.
Available at https doi.org/10.1016/
j.respol.2018.07.019.

E:FRFM06JAR1.SGM

06JAR1