Research Data Sharing in Spain: Exploring Determinants, Practices, and Perceptions

This work provides an overview of a Spanish survey on research data, which was carried out within the framework of the project Datasea at the beginning of 2015. It is covered by the objectives of sustainable development (goal 9) to support the research. The purpose of the study was to identify the habits and current experiences of Spanish researchers in the health sciences in relation to the management and sharing of raw research data. Method: An electronic questionnaire composed of 40 questions divided into three blocks was designed. The three Section s contained questions on the following aspects: (A) personal information; (B) creation and reuse of data; and (C) preservation of data. The questionnaire was sent by email to a list of universities in Spain to be distributed among their researchers and professors. A total of 1063 researchers completed the questionnaire. More than half of the respondents (54.9%) lacked a data management plan; nearly a quarter had storage systems for the research group; 81.5% used personal computers to store data; “Contact with colleagues” was the most frequent means used to locate and access other researchers’ data; and nearly 60% of researchers stated their data were available to the research group and collaborating colleagues. The main fears about sharing were legal questions (47.9%), misuse or interpretation of data (42.7%), and loss of authorship (28.7%). The results allow us to understand the state of data sharing among Spanish researchers and can serve as a basis to identify the needs of researchers to share data, optimize existing infrastructure, and promote data sharing among those who do not practice it yet.

Download Full-text

Perceptions and Attitudes toward Data Sharing among Dental Researchers

JDR Clinical & Translational Research ◽

10.1177/2380084418790451 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 68-75 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

H. Spallek ◽

S.M. Weinberg ◽

M. Manz ◽

S. Nanayakkara ◽

X. Zhou ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Data Management ◽

Data Sharing ◽

International Association ◽

Improve Patient Care ◽

Research Data ◽

Research Subjects ◽

Data Repositories ◽

Use Of Data ◽

Share Data ◽

Past Experiences

Introduction: Increasing attention is being given to the roles of data management and data sharing in the advancement of research. This study was undertaken to explore opinions and past experiences of established dental researchers as related to data sharing and data management. Methods: Researchers were recruited from the International Association for Dental Research scientific groups to complete a survey consisting of Likert-type, multiple-choice, and open-ended questions. Results: All 42 respondents indicated that data sharing should be promoted and facilitated, but many indicated reservations or concerns about the proper use of data and the protection of research subjects. Many had used data from data repositories and received requests for data originating from their studies. Opinions varied regarding restrictions such as requirements to share data and the time limits of investigator rights to keep data. Respondents also varied in their methods of data management and storage, with younger respondents and those with higher direct costs of their research tending to use dedicated experts to manage their data. Discussion: The expressed respondent support for research data sharing, with the noted concerns, complements the idea of developing managed data clearinghouses capable of promoting, managing, and overseeing the data-sharing process. Knowledge Transfer Statement: Researchers can use the results of this study to evaluate and improve management and sharing of research data. By encouraging and facilitating the data-sharing process, research can advance more efficiently, and research findings can be implemented into practice more rapidly to improve patient care and the overall oral health of populations.

Download Full-text

A Research data Sharing Game

10.7287/peerj.preprints.599v1 ◽

2014 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Tessa E Pronk ◽

Paulien H Wiersma ◽

Anne van Weerden

Keyword(s):

Game Theory ◽

Decision Theory ◽

Data Sharing ◽

Scientific Community ◽

Data Retrieval ◽

Research Data ◽

Top Down ◽

Average Efficiency ◽

Natural Tendency ◽

Share Data

While reusing research data has evident benefits for the scientific community as a whole, decisions to archive and share these data are primarily made by individual researchers. For individuals, it is less obvious that the benefits of sharing data outweigh the associated costs, i.e. time and money. In this sense the problem of data sharing resembles a typical game in interactive decision theory, more commonly known as game theory. Within this framework we analyse in this paper how different measures to promote sharing and reuse of research data affect sharing and not sharing individuals. We find that the scientific community can benefit from top-down policies to enhance sharing data even when the act of sharing itself implies a cost. Namely, if (almost) everyone shares, many individuals can gain a higher efficiency as datasets can be reused. Additionally, measures to ensure better data retrieval and quality can compensate for sharing costs by enabling reuse. Nevertheless, an individual researcher who decides not to share omits the costs of sharing. Assuming that the natural tendency will be to use a strategy that will lead to maximisation of individual efficiency it is seen that, as more individuals decide not to share, there is a point at which average efficiency for both sharing and non-sharing researchers becomes lower than was originally the case and scientific community efficiency steadily drops. With this in mind, we conclude that the key to motivate the researcher to share data lies in reducing the costs associated with sharing, or even better, turning it into a benefit.

Download Full-text

A survey of researchers' needs and priorities for data sharing

10.31219/osf.io/njr5u ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Iain Hrynaszkiewicz ◽

James Harney ◽

Lauren Cadwallader

Keyword(s):

Data Sharing ◽

Research Impact ◽

Open Science ◽

Research Data ◽

Data Reuse ◽

Data Availability ◽

Data Repositories ◽

Use Of Data ◽

Share Data ◽

Do So

PLOS has long supported Open Science. One of the ways in which we do so is via our stringent data availability policy established in 2014. Despite this policy, and more data sharing policies being introduced by other organizations, best practices for data sharing are adopted by a minority of researchers in their publications. Problems with effective research data sharing persist and these problems have been quantified by previous research as a lack of time, resources, incentives, and/or skills to share data. In this study we built on this research by investigating the importance of tasks associated with data sharing, and researchers’ satisfaction with their ability to complete these tasks. By investigating these factors we aimed to better understand opportunities for new or improved solutions for sharing data. In May-June 2020 we surveyed researchers from Europe and North America to rate tasks associated with data sharing on (i) their importance and (ii) their satisfaction with their ability to complete them. We received 728 completed and 667 partial responses. We calculated mean importance and satisfaction scores to highlight potential opportunities for new solutions to and compare different cohorts.Tasks relating to research impact, funder compliance, and credit had the highest importance scores. 52% of respondents reuse research data but the average satisfaction score for obtaining data for reuse was relatively low. Tasks associated with sharing data were rated somewhat important and respondents were reasonably well satisfied in their ability to accomplish them. Notably, this included tasks associated with best data sharing practice, such as use of data repositories. However, the most common method for sharing data was in fact via supplemental files with articles, which is not considered to be best practice.We presume that researchers are unlikely to seek new solutions to a problem or task that they are satisfied in their ability to accomplish, even if many do not attempt this task. This implies there are few opportunities for new solutions or tools to meet these researcher needs. Publishers can likely meet these needs for data sharing by working to seamlessly integrate existing solutions that reduce the effort or behaviour change involved in some tasks, and focusing on advocacy and education around the benefits of sharing data. There may however be opportunities - unmet researcher needs - in relation to better supporting data reuse, which could be met in part by strengthening data sharing policies of journals and publishers, and improving the discoverability of data associated with published articles.

Download Full-text

Researchers at Arab Universities Hold Positive Views on Research Data Management and Data Sharing

Evidence Based Library and Information Practice ◽

10.18438/eblip29746 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 15 (2) ◽

pp. 168-170

Author(s):

Jennifer Kaari

Keyword(s):

Data Management ◽

Data Sharing ◽

Data Privacy ◽

Management Practices ◽

Open Data ◽

Scientific Progress ◽

Management Plan ◽

Research Data ◽

Data Repository ◽

Research Data Management

A Review of: Elsayed, A. M., & Saleh, E. I. (2018). Research data management and sharing among researchers in Arab universities: An exploratory study. IFLA Journal, 44(4), 281–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035218785196 Abstract Objective – To investigate researchers’ practices and attitudes regarding research data management and data sharing. Design – Email survey. Setting – Universities in Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Subjects – Surveys were sent to 4,086 academic faculty researchers. Methods – The survey was emailed to faculty at three Arab universities, targeting faculty in the life sciences and engineering. The survey was created using Google Docs and remained open for five months. Participants were asked basic demographic questions, questions regarding their research data and metadata practices, and questions regarding their data sharing practices. Main Results – The authors received 337 responses, for a response rate of 8%. The results showed that 48.4% of respondents had a data management plan and that 97% were responsible for preserving their own data. Most respondents stored their research data on their personal storage devices. The authors found that 64.4% of respondents reported sharing their research data. Respondents most frequently shared their data by publishing in a data research journal, sharing through academic social networks such as ResearchGate, and providing data upon request to peers. Only 5.1% of respondents shared data through an open data repository. Of those who did not share data, data privacy and confidentiality were the most common reasons cited. Of the respondents who did share their data, contributing to scientific progress and increased citation and visibility were the primary reasons for doing so. A total of 59.6% of respondents stated that they needed more training in research data management from their universities. Conclusion – The authors conclude that researchers at Arab universities are still primarily responsible for their own data and that data management planning is still a new concept to most researchers. For the most part, the researchers had a positive attitude toward data sharing, although depositing data in open repositories is still not a widespread practice. The authors conclude that in order to encourage strong data management practices and open data sharing among Arab university researchers, more training and institutional support is needed.

Download Full-text

Research Data Management and Data Sharing among Research Scholars of Life Sciences and Social Sciences

DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology ◽

10.14429/djlit.39.06.14997 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 39 (06) ◽

pp. 290-299

Author(s):

Naushad Ali PM ◽

Sidra Saeed

Keyword(s):

Social Sciences ◽

Data Management ◽

Data Sharing ◽

Life Sciences ◽

Scientific Progress ◽

Research Data ◽

Key Factors ◽

Research Data Management ◽

Share Data

This study investigates perception of research scholars towards research data management and sharing. A survey was conducted among research scholars from Faculty of Life Sciences and Social Sciences, Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). In total, 352 participants filled out the questionnaire. The study shows that research scholars ofFaculty of Social Sciences are more willing to share their research data as compared to Research Scholars of Life Sciences. Contributing to scientific progress and increasing research citations and visibility were the key factors that motivated researchers to share data. However, confidentiality and data misuse were the main concerns among those who were unwilling to share. Finally, some recommendations to improve the of data management and sharing practices are presented.

Download Full-text

Promoting data sharing among Indonesian scientists: A proposal of generic university-level Research Data Management Plan (RDMP)

Research Ideas and Outcomes ◽

10.3897/rio.4.e28163 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 4 ◽

pp. e28163

Author(s):

Dasapta Irawan ◽

Cut Rachmi

Keyword(s):

Data Management ◽

Data Sharing ◽

National Level ◽

Management Plan ◽

Research Data ◽

Scientific Practices ◽

Research Data Management ◽

University Level ◽

Time And Energy ◽

Backup Storage

Every researcher needs data in their working ecosystem, but despite of the resources (funding, time, and energy), that they have spent to get the data, only a few are putting more real attention to data management. This paper is mainly describing our recommendation of RDMP document at university level. This paper would be a form of our initiative to be developed at university or national level, which also in-line with current development in scientific practices mandating data sharing and data re-use. Researchers can use this article as an assessment form to describe the setting of their research and data management. Researcher can also develop more detail RDMP to cater specific project's environment. In this Research Data Management Plan (RDMP), we propose three levels of storage: offline working storage, offline backup storage and online-cloud backup storage, located on a shared-repository. We also propose two kinds of cloud repository: a dynamic repository to store live data and a static repository to keep a copy of final data. Hopefully, this RDMP could solve problems on data sharing and preservation, and additionally could increase researchers' awareness about data management to increase the value and impact of their researches.

Download Full-text

A research data sharing game

10.7287/peerj.preprints.599v2 ◽

2014 ◽

Author(s):

Tessa E Pronk ◽

Paulien H Wiersma ◽

Anne van Weerden

Keyword(s):

Game Theory ◽

Decision Theory ◽

Data Sharing ◽

Scientific Community ◽

Data Retrieval ◽

Research Data ◽

Top Down ◽

Individual Researcher ◽

Natural Tendency ◽

Share Data

While reusing research data has evident benefits for the scientific community as a whole, decisions to archive and share these data are primarily made by individual researchers. For individuals, it is less obvious that the benefits of sharing data outweigh the associated costs, for example time and money. In this sense the problem of data sharing resembles a typical game in interactive decision theory, more commonly known as game theory. Within this framework we analyse how measures to promote sharing and reuse of research data affect individuals who do and do not share data. We find that the scientific community can benefit from top-down policies to enhance sharing data even when the act of sharing itself implies a cost. Namely, if (almost) everyone shares, many individuals receive benefits, as datasets in our model can be reused to achieve a higher efficiency (i.e. more publications, higher quality papers). Surprisingly, as sharing implies a cost, even sharing individuals themselves, in a community in which sharing is common, can gain a higher efficiency than individuals who do not share, in a community in which sharing is not common. In addition to these findings, we find that measures to ensure better data retrieval and quality can compensate for sharing costs by further enabling reuse. Nevertheless, an individual researcher who decides not to share omits the costs of sharing. Assuming that the natural tendency will be to use a strategy that will lead to maximisation of individual efficiency, we see the average scientific community efficiency in our model steadily drop as more individuals decide not to share. With this in mind, we conclude that the key to motivate the researcher to share data lies in reducing the costs associated with sharing, or even better, turning it into a benefit.

Download Full-text

Data sharing practices and data availability upon request differ across scientific disciplines

Scientific Data ◽

10.1038/s41597-021-00981-0 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Leho Tedersoo ◽

Rainer Küngas ◽

Ester Oras ◽

Kajar Köster ◽

Helen Eenmaa ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Data Sharing ◽

Large Scale ◽

Modern Science ◽

Research Data ◽

Data Availability ◽

Research Articles ◽

Scientific Disciplines ◽

Funding Agencies ◽

Share Data ◽

Bonus Points

AbstractData sharing is one of the cornerstones of modern science that enables large-scale analyses and reproducibility. We evaluated data availability in research articles across nine disciplines in Nature and Science magazines and recorded corresponding authors’ concerns, requests and reasons for declining data sharing. Although data sharing has improved in the last decade and particularly in recent years, data availability and willingness to share data still differ greatly among disciplines. We observed that statements of data availability upon (reasonable) request are inefficient and should not be allowed by journals. To improve data sharing at the time of manuscript acceptance, researchers should be better motivated to release their data with real benefits such as recognition, or bonus points in grant and job applications. We recommend that data management costs should be covered by funding agencies; publicly available research data ought to be included in the evaluation of applications; and surveillance of data sharing should be enforced by both academic publishers and funders. These cross-discipline survey data are available from the plutoF repository.

Download Full-text

Sharing health research data – the role of funders in improving the impact

F1000Research ◽

10.12688/f1000research.16523.2 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 7 ◽

pp. 1641 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Robert F. Terry ◽

Katherine Littler ◽

Piero L. Olliaro

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Data Sharing ◽

Ethical Issues ◽

Good Practice ◽

Research Data ◽

Subsequent Publication ◽

Share Data ◽

Registry Entry ◽

The Impact

Recent public health emergencies with outbreaks of influenza, Ebola and Zika revealed that the mechanisms for sharing research data are neither being used, or adequate for the purpose, particularly where data needs to be shared rapidly. A review of research papers, including completed clinical trials related to priority pathogens, found only 31% (98 out of 319 published papers, excluding case studies) provided access to all the data underlying the paper - 65% of these papers give no information on how to find or access the data. Only two clinical trials out of 58 on interventions for WHO priority pathogens provided any link in their registry entry to the background data. Interviews with researchers revealed a reluctance to share data included a lack of confidence in the utility of the data; an absence of academic-incentives for rapid dissemination that prevents subsequent publication and a disconnect between those who are collecting the data and those who wish to use it quickly. The role of the funders of research needs to change to address this. Funders need to engage early with the researchers and related stakeholders to understand their concerns and work harder to define the more explicitly the benefits to all stakeholders. Secondly, there needs to be a direct benefit to sharing data that is directly relevant to those people that collect and curate the data. Thirdly more work needs to be done to realise the intent of making data sharing resources more equitable, ethical and efficient. Finally, a checklist of the issues that need to be addressed when designing new or revising existing data sharing resources should be created. This checklist would highlight the technical, cultural and ethical issues that need to be considered and point to examples of emerging good practice that can be used to address them.

Download Full-text

Ethical and practical issues to consider in the governance of genomic and human research data and data sharing in South Africa: a meeting report

AAS Open Research ◽

10.12688/aasopenres.12968.1 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 2 ◽

pp. 15

Author(s):

Ciara Staunton ◽

Rachel Adams ◽

Edward S. Dove ◽

Natalie Harriman ◽

Lyn Horn ◽

...

Keyword(s):

South Africa ◽

Data Sharing ◽

Data Protection ◽

Health Research ◽

Personal Information ◽

Open Science ◽

Research Data ◽

Genomic Research ◽

Meeting Report ◽

Challenges And Opportunities

Genomic research and biobanking has undergone exponential growth in Africa and at the heart of this research is the sharing of biospecimens and associated clinical data amongst researchers in Africa and across the world. While this move towards open science is progressing, there has been a strengthening internationally of data protection regulations that seek to safeguard the rights of data subjects while promoting the movement of data for the benefit of research. In line with this global shift, many jurisdictions in Africa are introducing data protection regulations, but there has been limited consideration of the regulation of data sharing for genomic research and biobanking in Africa. South Africa (SA) is one country that has sought to regulate the international sharing of data and has enacted the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) 2013 that will change the governance and regulation of data in SA, including health research data, once it is in force. To identify and discuss challenges and opportunities in the governance of data sharing for genomic and health research data in SA, a two-day meeting was convened in February 2019 in Cape Town, SA with over 30 participants with expertise in law, ethics, genomics and biobanking science, drawn from academia, industry, and government. This report sets out some of the key challenges identified during the workshop and the opportunities and limitations of the current regulatory framework in SA.

Download Full-text