IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v5y2019i1d10.1057_s41599-019-0283-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Management at the service of research: ReOmicS, a quality management system for omics sciences

Author

Listed:
  • Antonella Lanati

    (Valore Qualità)

  • Marinella Marzano

    (Bioenergetica e Biotecnologie Molecolari (IBIOM), CNR)

  • Caterina Manzari

    (Bioenergetica e Biotecnologie Molecolari (IBIOM), CNR)

  • Bruno Fosso

    (Bioenergetica e Biotecnologie Molecolari (IBIOM), CNR)

  • Graziano Pesole

    (Bioenergetica e Biotecnologie Molecolari (IBIOM), CNR
    Università degli Studi di Bari “Aldo Moro”)

  • Francesca De Leo

    (Bioenergetica e Biotecnologie Molecolari (IBIOM), CNR)

Abstract

Management and research represent a binomial almost unknown, whose potentialities and requirements have not yet been fully exploited even if, recently, the scientific and social communities have felt the burden of producing results and data requiring at the same time reproducibility, reliability, safety and efficacy of the discoveries, as well as a profitable use of resources. A Quality Management System (QMS) could represent a valid tool for these purposes, improving the quality of the research. The research community could ask whether and how it is possible to apply this approach in a research laboratory without hindering their creativity, and what the possible benefits might be. On the other hand, an international standard for a quality management system appropriate for a research laboratory is yet to come. The choice, the design and the application of a QMS, inspired by the Good Laboratory Practices, in a research laboratory specialized on “omics” sciences, is fully described in this paper. Its application has already shown good outcomes as testified by specific metric of efficiency and effectiveness. The approach is innovative as there is no obvious requirement for research laboratories to develop and define quality objectives. The paper highlights how the QMS approach enhances the relationship with public and private sectors by increasing customer confidence and loyalty, as well as improving the overall performance of the laboratory in terms of throughput and value of research. These results encourage proposing it as a QMS model providing a new and scalable operational strategy to be applied in a research environment with the same target and even in a generic research laboratory.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonella Lanati & Marinella Marzano & Caterina Manzari & Bruno Fosso & Graziano Pesole & Francesca De Leo, 2019. "Management at the service of research: ReOmicS, a quality management system for omics sciences," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:5:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-019-0283-0
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-019-0283-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-019-0283-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-019-0283-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oecd, 2019. "Reference framework for assessing the scientific and socio-economic impact of research infrastructures," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers 65, OECD Publishing.
    2. Monya Baker, 2016. "1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility," Nature, Nature, vol. 533(7604), pages 452-454, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nathalie Taverdet-Popiolek, 2022. "Economic Footprint of a Large French Research and Technology Organisation in Europe: Deciphering a Simplified Model and Appraising the Results," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(1), pages 44-69, March.
    2. Fernando Hoces de la Guardia & Sean Grant & Edward Miguel, 2021. "A framework for open policy analysis," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(2), pages 154-163.
    3. Ferguson, Joel & Littman, Rebecca & Christensen, Garret & Paluck, Elizabeth & Swanson, Nicholas & Wang, Zenan & Miguel, Edward & Birke, David & Pezzuto, John-Henry, 2023. "Survey of open science practices and attitudes in the social sciences," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt95g5h77z, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    4. Bor Luen Tang, 2023. "Some Insights into the Factors Influencing Continuous Citation of Retracted Scientific Papers," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Rosenblatt, Lucas & Herman, Bernease & Holovenko, Anastasia & Lee, Wonkwon & Loftus, Joshua & McKinnie, Elizabeth & Rumezhak, Taras & Stadnik, Andrii & Howe, Bill & Stoyanovich, Julia, 2023. "Epistemic parity: reproducibility as an evaluation metric for differential privacy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120493, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Inga Patarčić & Jadranka Stojanovski, 2022. "Adoption of Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines across Journals," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-10, November.
    7. Susanne Wieschowski & Svenja Biernot & Susanne Deutsch & Silke Glage & André Bleich & René Tolba & Daniel Strech, 2019. "Publication rates in animal research. Extent and characteristics of published and non-published animal studies followed up at two German university medical centres," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-8, November.
    8. Shinichi Nakagawa & Edward R. Ivimey-Cook & Matthew J. Grainger & Rose E. O’Dea & Samantha Burke & Szymon M. Drobniak & Elliot Gould & Erin L. Macartney & April Robin Martinig & Kyle Morrison & Matthi, 2023. "Method Reporting with Initials for Transparency (MeRIT) promotes more granularity and accountability for author contributions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-5, December.
    9. Paul J. Ferraro & J. Dustin Tracy, 2022. "A reassessment of the potential for loss-framed incentive contracts to increase productivity: a meta-analysis and a real-effort experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(5), pages 1441-1466, November.
    10. Brian M. Schilder & Alan E. Murphy & Nathan G. Skene, 2024. "rworkflows: automating reproducible practices for the R community," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Tim Hulsen, 2020. "Sharing Is Caring—Data Sharing Initiatives in Healthcare," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-12, April.
    12. Michael Meiser & Ingo Zinnikus, 2024. "A Survey on the Use of Synthetic Data for Enhancing Key Aspects of Trustworthy AI in the Energy Domain: Challenges and Opportunities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-29, April.
    13. Chris H. J. Hartgerink & Marino Van Zelst, 2018. "“As-You-Go” Instead of “After-the-Fact”: A Network Approach to Scholarly Communication and Evaluation," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-10, April.
    14. Lingjing Jiang & Niina Haiminen & Anna‐Paola Carrieri & Shi Huang & Yoshiki Vázquez‐Baeza & Laxmi Parida & Ho‐Cheol Kim & Austin D. Swafford & Rob Knight & Loki Natarajan, 2022. "Utilizing stability criteria in choosing feature selection methods yields reproducible results in microbiome data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(3), pages 1155-1167, September.
    15. Joshua Borycz & Robert Olendorf & Alison Specht & Bruce Grant & Kevin Crowston & Carol Tenopir & Suzie Allard & Natalie M. Rice & Rachael Hu & Robert J. Sandusky, 2023. "Perceived benefits of open data are improving but scientists still lack resources, skills, and rewards," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Kroll, Henning & Hansmeier, Hendrik & Hufnagl, Miriam, 2022. "Productive interactions in basic research an enquiry into impact pathways at the DESY synchrotron," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    17. Paul-Martin Luc & Simon Bauer & Julia Kowal, 2022. "Reproducible Production of Lithium-Ion Coin Cells," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-16, October.
    18. Cantone, Giulio Giacomo, 2023. "The multiversal methodology as a remedy of the replication crisis," MetaArXiv kuhmz, Center for Open Science.
    19. Ron S. Kenett & Abraham Rubinstein, 2021. "Generalizing research findings for enhanced reproducibility: an approach based on verbal alternative representations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 4137-4151, May.
    20. Naudé, Wim, 2024. "Is the Scholarly Field of Entrepreneurship at Its End?," IZA Discussion Papers 16916, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:5:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-019-0283-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.