A template and tutorial for preregistering studies using passive smartphone measures.

Passive smartphone measures hold significant potential and are increasingly employed in psychological and biomedical research to capture an individual's behavior. These measures involve the near-continuous and unobtrusive collection of data from smartphones without requiring active input from participants. For example, GPS sensors are used to determine the (social) context of a person, and accelerometers to measure movement. However, utilizing passive smartphone measures presents methodological challenges during data collection and analysis. Researchers must make multiple decisions when working with such measures, which can result in different conclusions. Unfortunately, the transparency of these decision-making processes is often lacking. The implementation of open science practices is only beginning to emerge in digital phenotyping studies and varies widely across studies. Well-intentioned researchers may fail to report on some decisions due to the variety of choices that must be made. To address this issue and enhance reproducibility in digital phenotyping studies, we propose the adoption of preregistration as a way forward. Although there have been some attempts to preregister digital phenotyping studies, a template for registering such studies is currently missing. This could be problematic due to the high level of complexity that requires a well-structured template. Therefore, our objective was to develop a preregistration template that is easy to use and understandable for researchers. Additionally, we explain this template and provide resources to assist researchers in making informed decisions regarding data collection, cleaning, and analysis. Overall, we aim to make researchers' choices explicit, enhance transparency, and elevate the standards for studies utilizing passive smartphone measures.

A guide for social science journal editors on easing into open science.

Journal editors have a large amount of power to advance open science in their respective fields by incentivising and mandating open policies and practices at their journals. The Data PASS Journal Editors Discussion Interface (JEDI, an online community for social science journal editors: www.dpjedi.org ) has collated several resources on embedding open science in journal editing ( www.dpjedi.org/resources ). However, it can be overwhelming as an editor new to open science practices to know where to start. For this reason, we created a guide for journal editors on how to get started with open science. The guide outlines steps that editors can take to implement open policies and practices within their journal, and goes through the what, why, how, and worries of each policy and practice. This manuscript introduces and summarizes the guide (full guide: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/hstcx ).

We don't know what you did last summer. On the importance of transparent reporting of reaction time data pre-processing.

In behavioral, cognitive, and social sciences, reaction time measures are an important source of information. However, analyses on reaction time data are affected by researchers' analytical choices and the order in which these choices are applied. The results of a systematic literature review, presented in this paper, revealed that the justification for and order in which analytical choices are conducted are rarely reported, leading to difficulty in reproducing results and interpreting mixed findings. To address this methodological shortcoming, we created a checklist on reporting reaction time pre-processing to make these decisions more explicit, improve transparency, and thus, promote best practices within the field. The importance of the pre-processing checklist was additionally supported by an expert consensus survey and a multiverse analysis. Consequently, we appeal for maximal transparency on all methods applied and offer a checklist to improve replicability and reproducibility of studies that use reaction time measures.

How Safe and Technical Is Modified Dunn Osteotomy in the Management of Patients with SCFE: A Clinical Trial with Short-Term Follow-Up.

Objective: Over the last decade, modified Dunn osteotomy has been widely used in the management of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) with varying degrees of complications. Different conclusions have been adopted. Our study represented our experience in using such a technique in stable and unstable SCFE and tried to determine its safety and applicability for routine practice. Methods: Our study adopted an interventional prospective design performed on 24 hips divided evenly between both sexes with a mean age of 13.25. On the Southwick classification, the cases were distributed between moderate and severe, which constituted 41.7% and 58.33%, respectively. Three quarters of the study subjects were stable according to the Loder classification. Each underwent modified Dunn osteotomy after a safe surgical hip dislocation. Results: Over the period of about 1-year follow-up, clinical evaluation was performed by examining the surgical site and assessing the legs' length, range of hip movement, Harris hip score, and iHOT-12 score. Radiological assessment was performed by calculation of slip angle from the frog lateral view, assessment of union, and occurrence of any complications. The study showed that there was significant improvement in patients in terms of radiological and clinical outcomes, with the occurrence of AVN in 16.7% of cases (4 out of 24). All cases of AVN occurred in unstable hips. Conclusion: Despite the complication of AVN, we believe the results of this study add to the current literature which suggests that modified Dunn osteotomy is an effective and safe technique for the management of moderate and severe SCFE. This trial is registered with PACTR202312819351504.