scholarly journals The Open Data Challenge: An Analysis of 124,000 Data Availability Statements and an Ironic Lesson about Data Management Plans

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 554-568
Author(s):  
Chris Graf ◽  
Dave Flanagan ◽  
Lisa Wylie ◽  
Deirdre Silver
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Data Management ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Trends Over Time ◽  
New Research ◽  
Over Time

Data availability statements can provide useful information about how researchers actually share research data. We used unsupervised machine learning to analyze 124,000 data availability statements submitted by research authors to 176 Wiley journals between 2013 and 2019. We categorized the data availability statements, and looked at trends over time. We found expected increases in the number of data availability statements submitted over time, and marked increases that correlate with policy changes made by journals. Our open data challenge becomes to use what we have learned to present researchers with relevant and easy options that help them to share and make an impact with new research data.

scholarly journals FAIR Data Austria - Aligning the Implementation of FAIR Tools and Services

2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne Blumesberger ◽  
Nikos Gänsdorfer ◽  
Raman Ganguly ◽  
Eva Gergely ◽  
Alexander Gruber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Support Services ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Project Objectives ◽  
Training And Support

This article gives an overview of the FAIR Data Austria project objectives and current results. In collaboration with our project partners, we work on the development and establishment of tools for managing the lifecycle of research data, including machine-actionable Data Management Plans (maDMPs), repositories for long-term archiving of research results, RDM training and support services, models, and profiles for Data Stewards and FAIR Office Austria.

scholarly journals NFDI4Chem - Towards a National Research Data Infrastructure for Chemistry in Germany

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Steinbeck ◽  
Oliver Koepler ◽  
Felix Bach ◽  
Sonja Herres-Pawlis ◽  
Nicole Jung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Data Science ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Standards ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Data Infrastructure ◽  
Research Data Management ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Chemistry Community

The vision of NFDI4Chem is the digitalisation of all key steps in chemical research to support scientists in their efforts to collect, store, process, analyse, disclose and re-use research data. Measures to promote Open Science and Research Data Management (RDM) in agreement with the FAIR data principles are fundamental aims of NFDI4Chem to serve the chemistry community with a holistic concept for access to research data. To this end, the overarching objective is the development and maintenance of a national research data infrastructure for the research domain of chemistry in Germany, and to enable innovative and easy to use services and novel scientific approaches based on re-use of research data. NFDI4Chem intends to represent all disciplines of chemistry in academia. We aim to collaborate closely with thematically related consortia. In the initial phase, NFDI4Chem focuses on data related to molecules and reactions including data for their experimental and theoretical characterisation. This overarching goal is achieved by working towards a number of key objectives: Key Objective 1: Establish a virtual environment of federated repositories for storing, disclosing, searching and re-using research data across distributed data sources. Connect existing data repositories and, based on a requirements analysis, establish domain-specific research data repositories for the national research community, and link them to international repositories. Key Objective 2: Initiate international community processes to establish minimum information (MI) standards for data and machine-readable metadata as well as open data standards in key areas of chemistry. Identify and recommend open data standards in key areas of chemistry, in order to support the FAIR principles for research data. Finally, develop standards, if there is a lack. Key Objective 3: Foster cultural and digital change towards Smart Laboratory Environments by promoting the use of digital tools in all stages of research and promote subsequent Research Data Management (RDM) at all levels of academia, beginning in undergraduate studies curricula. Key Objective 4: Engage with the chemistry community in Germany through a wide range of measures to create awareness for and foster the adoption of FAIR data management. Initiate processes to integrate RDM and data science into curricula. Offer a wide range of training opportunities for researchers. Key Objective 5: Explore synergies with other consortia and promote cross-cutting development within the NFDI. Key Objective 6: Provide a legally reliable framework of policies and guidelines for FAIR and open RDM.

scholarly journals Research data management and services: Resources for novice data librarians

2017 ◽  
Vol 78 (5) ◽  
pp. 274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Barbrow ◽  
Denise Brush ◽  
Julie Goldman
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Data Management ◽  
Academic Libraries ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Data Management ◽  
Academic Fields ◽  
Data Life Cycle ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Share Data

Research in many academic fields today generates large amounts of data. These data not only must be processed and analyzed by the researchers, but also managed throughout the data life cycle. Recently, some academic libraries have begun to offer research data management (RDM) services to their communities. Often, this service starts with helping faculty write data management plans, now required by many federal granting agencies. Libraries with more developed services may work with researchers as they decide how to archive and share data once the grant work is complete.

scholarly journals Open Data Policies among Library and Information Science Journals

Publications ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Brian Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Information Science ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Data Archiving ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Public Data

Journal publishers play an important role in the open research data ecosystem. Through open data policies that include public data archiving mandates and data availability statements, journal publishers help promote transparency in research and wider access to a growing scholarly record. The library and information science (LIS) discipline has a unique relationship with both open data initiatives and academic publishing and may be well-positioned to adopt rigorous open data policies. This study examines the information provided on public-facing websites of LIS journals in order to describe the extent, and nature, of open data guidance provided to prospective authors. Open access journals in the discipline have disproportionately adopted detailed, strict open data policies. Commercial publishers, which account for the largest share of publishing in the discipline, have largely adopted weaker policies. Rigorous policies, adopted by a minority of journals, describe the rationale, application, and expectations for open research data, while most journals that provide guidance on the matter use hesitant and vague language. Recommendations are provided for strengthening journal open data policies.

scholarly journals eLabFTW as an Open Science tool to improve the quality and translation of preclinical research

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 292
Author(s):  
Michael Hewera ◽  
Daniel Hänggi ◽  
Björn Gerlach ◽  
Ulf Dietrich Kahlert
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Preclinical Research ◽  
Research Data Management ◽  
New Methods ◽  
Set Up

Reports of non-replicable research demand new methods of research data management. Electronic laboratory notebooks (ELNs) are suggested as tools to improve the documentation of research data and make them universally accessible. In a self-guided approach, we introduced the open-source ELN eLabFTW into our lab group and, after using it for a while, think it is a useful tool to overcome hurdles in ELN introduction by providing a combination of properties making it suitable for small preclinical labs, like ours. We set up our instance of eLabFTW, without any further programming needed. Our efforts to embrace open data approach by introducing an ELN fits well with other institutional organized ELN initiatives in academic research.

scholarly journals The History, Advocacy and Efficacy of Data Management Plans

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Smale ◽  
Kathryn Unsworth ◽  
Gareth Denyer ◽  
Daniel Barr
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Management ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Multiple Use ◽  
Funding Body ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Recent Developments

AbstractData management plans (DMPs) have increasingly been encouraged as a key component of institutional and funding body policy. Although DMPs necessarily place administrative burden on researchers, proponents claim that DMPs have myriad benefits, including enhanced research data quality, increased rates of data sharing, and institutional planning and compliance benefits.In this manuscript, we explore the international history of DMPs and describe institutional and funding body DMP policy. We find that economic and societal benefits from presumed increased rates of data sharing was the original driver of mandating DMPs by funding bodies. Today, 86% of UK Research Councils and 63% of US funding bodies require submission of a DMP with funding applications. Given that no major Australian funding bodies require DMP submission, it is of note that 37% of Australian universities have taken the initiative to internally mandate DMPs.Institutions both within Australia and internationally frequently promote the professional benefits of DMP use, and endorse DMPs as ‘best practice’. We analyse one such typical DMP implementation at a major Australian institution, finding that DMPs have low levels of apparent translational value. Indeed, an extensive literature review suggests there is very limited published systematic evidence that DMP use has any tangible benefit for researchers, institutions or funding bodies.We are therefore led to question why DMPs have become the go-to tool for research data professionals and advocates of good data practice. By delineating multiple use-cases and highlighting the need for DMPs to be fit for intended purpose, we question the view that a good DMP is necessarily that which encompasses the entire data lifecycle of a project. Finally, we summarise recent developments in the DMP landscape, and note a positive shift towards evidence-based research management through more researcher-centric, educative, and integrated DMP services.

scholarly journals Plano de gestão de dados fair: uma proposta para a Fiocruz | Fair data management plan: a proposal for Fiocruz

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Viviane Santos de Oliveira Veiga ◽  
Patricia Henning ◽  
Simone Dib ◽  
Erick Penedo ◽  
Jefferson Da Costa Lima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Data Management ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Research Data Management ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Fair Principles

RESUMO Este artigo trás para discussão o papel dos planos de gestão de dados como instrumento facilitador da gestão dos dados durante todo o ciclo de vida da pesquisa. A abertura de dados de pesquisa é pauta prioritária nas agendas científicas, por ampliar tanto a visibilidade e transparência das investigações, como a capacidade de reprodutibilidade e reuso dos dados em novas pesquisas. Nesse contexto, os princípios FAIR, um acrônimo para ‘Findable’, ‘Accessible’, ‘Interoperable’ e ‘Reusable’ é fundamental por estabelecerem orientações basilares e norteadoras na gestão, curadoria e preservação dos dados de pesquisa direcionados para o compartilhamento e o reuso. O presente trabalho tem por objetivo apresentar uma proposta de template de Plano de Gestão de Dados, alinhado aos princípios FAIR, para a Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. A metodologia utilizada é de natureza bibliográfica e de análise documental de diversos planos de gestão de dados europeus. Concluímos que a adoção de um plano de gestão nas práticas cientificas de universidades e instituições de pesquisa é fundamental. No entanto, para tirar maior proveito dessa atividade é necessário contar com a participação de todos os atores envolvidos no processo, além disso, esse plano de gestão deve ser machine-actionable, ou seja, acionável por máquina.Palavras-chave: Plano de Gestão de Dados; Dado de Pesquisa; Princípios FAIR; PGD Acionável por Máquina; Ciência Aberta.ABSTRACT This article proposes to discuss the role of data management plans as a tool to facilitate data management during researches life cycle. Today, research data opening is a primary agenda at scientific agencies as it may boost investigations’ visibility and transparency as well as the ability to reproduce and reuse its data on new researches. Within this context, FAIR principles, an acronym for Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable, is paramount, as it establishes basic and guiding orientations for research data management, curatorship and preservation with an intent on its sharing and reuse. The current work intends to present to the Fundação Oswaldo Cruz a new Data Management Plan template proposal, aligned with FAIR principles. The methodology used is bibliographical research and documental analysis of several European data management plans. We conclude that the adoption of a management plan on universities and research institutions scientific activities is paramount. However, to be fully benefited from this activity, all actors involved in the process must participate, and, on top of that, this plan must be machine-actionable.Keywords: Data Management Plan; Research Data; FAIR Principles; DMP Machine-Actionable; Open Science.

scholarly journals A descriptive analysis of the data availability statements accompanying medRxiv preprints and a comparison with their published counterparts

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. e0250887
Author(s):  
Luke A. McGuinness ◽  
Athena L. Sheppard
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Open Data ◽  
System Change ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Editorial Policies ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Closed Data

Objective To determine whether medRxiv data availability statements describe open or closed data—that is, whether the data used in the study is openly available without restriction—and to examine if this changes on publication based on journal data-sharing policy. Additionally, to examine whether data availability statements are sufficient to capture code availability declarations. Design Observational study, following a pre-registered protocol, of preprints posted on the medRxiv repository between 25th June 2019 and 1st May 2020 and their published counterparts. Main outcome measures Distribution of preprinted data availability statements across nine categories, determined by a prespecified classification system. Change in the percentage of data availability statements describing open data between the preprinted and published versions of the same record, stratified by journal sharing policy. Number of code availability declarations reported in the full-text preprint which were not captured in the corresponding data availability statement. Results 3938 medRxiv preprints with an applicable data availability statement were included in our sample, of which 911 (23.1%) were categorized as describing open data. 379 (9.6%) preprints were subsequently published, and of these published articles, only 155 contained an applicable data availability statement. Similar to the preprint stage, a minority (59 (38.1%)) of these published data availability statements described open data. Of the 151 records eligible for the comparison between preprinted and published stages, 57 (37.7%) were published in journals which mandated open data sharing. Data availability statements more frequently described open data on publication when the journal mandated data sharing (open at preprint: 33.3%, open at publication: 61.4%) compared to when the journal did not mandate data sharing (open at preprint: 20.2%, open at publication: 22.3%). Conclusion Requiring that authors submit a data availability statement is a good first step, but is insufficient to ensure data availability. Strict editorial policies that mandate data sharing (where appropriate) as a condition of publication appear to be effective in making research data available. We would strongly encourage all journal editors to examine whether their data availability policies are sufficiently stringent and consistently enforced.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document