Consistent and precise description of research outputs could improve implementation of open science

In 2013, the Center for Open Science (COS) proposed that journal articles be awarded “badges” for engaging in open science practices including “preregistration”. In 2015, the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines (TOP 2015) promoted “preregistration” of studies and analysis plans. Since then, the term “preregistration” has been used to describe different research outputs created at different times—sometimes, but not always, including a study registration. The updated TOP 2025 Guidelines no longer use the term “preregistration.” Instead, TOP 2025 disambiguates specific research outputs such as study registrations, study protocols, analysis plans, code, and other research materials. We also explain that the timing of “preregistration” is often unclear, and we propose researchers describe the time at which outputs are created and shared in relation to key study activities. Adopting more precise terminology used in TOP 2025, and describing the time at which specific research outputs are shared, will enhance understanding and support better reporting and implementation of open science.