scholarly journals DataverseNO: A National, Generic Repository and its Contribution to the Increased FAIRness of Data from the Long Tail of Research

Ravnetrykk ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Conzett
Keyword(s):  
Open Source Software ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Background Information ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Long Tail ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Research Organizations ◽  
Digital Objects ◽  
Organizational Features

Research data repositories play a crucial role in the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) ecosystem of digital objects. DataverseNO is a national, generic repository for open research data, primarily from researchers affiliated with Norwegian research organizations. The repository runs on the open-source software Dataverse. This article presents the organization and operation of DataverseNO, and investigates how the repository contributes to the increased FAIRness of small and medium sized research data. Sections 1 to 3 present background information about the FAIR Data Principles (section 1), how FAIR may be turned into reality (section 2), and what these principles and recommendations imply for data from the so-called long tail of research, i.e. small and medium-sized datasets that are often heterogenous in nature and hard to standardize (section 3). Section 4 gives an overview of the key organizational features of DataverseNO, followed by an evaluation of how well DataverseNO and the repository application Dataverse as such support the FAIR Data Principles (section 5). Section 6 discusses how sustainable and trustworthy the repository is. The article is rounded up in section 7 by a brief summary including a look into the future of the repository.

scholarly journals Tutkimusaineiston avoin jakaminen – tutkimusorganisaatioiden jäsenten käsityksiä, kokemuksia ja mielipiteitä

2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidi Enwald
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Data Storage ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Research Organizations ◽  
Data Collection Instrument ◽  
In The Beginning

Open research data is data that is free to access, reuse, and redistribute. This study focuses on the perceptions, opinions and experiences of staff and researchers of research institutes on topics related to open research data. Furthermore, the differences across gender, role in the research organization and research field were investigated. An international questionnaire survey, translated into Finnish and Swedish, was used as the data collection instrument. An online survey was distributed through an open science related network to Finnish research organizations. In the end, 469 responded to all 24 questions of the survey. Findings indicate that many are still unaware or uncertain about issues related to data sharing and long-term data storage. Women as well as staff and researchers of medical and health sciences were most concerned about the possible problems associated with data sharing. Those in the beginning of their scientific careers, hesitated about sharing their data.

scholarly journals The State of Dissemination of Open Research Data in Ukraine and the World: Bibliometric Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 209-217
Author(s):  
Anton Boiko ◽  
Olha Kramarenko ◽  
Sardar Shabanov
Keyword(s):  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Data Exchange ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Data ◽  
The State ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Open Research ◽  
The World ◽  
Data Files

Purpose: To determine the current state of development of open science in the paradigm of open research data in Ukraine and the world, as well as to analyze the representation of Ukraine in the world research space, in terms of research data exchange. Design / Method / Research Approach: Methods of synthesis, logical and comparative analysis used to determine the dynamics of the number of research data journals and data files in the world, as well as to quantify the share of research data repositories in Ukraine and the world. Trend and bibliometric analysis were used to determine the share of publications with their open primary data; analysis of their thematic structures; identification of the main scientific clusters of such publications; research of geographic indicators and share of publications by research institutions. Findings: The study found a tendency to increase both the number of data logs and data files in Dryad (open data repository). The results of the analysis of the share of data repositories indexed in re3data (register of research data repositories) show that 51% of the total number are repositories of data from European countries, with Germany leading with 460 repositories, followed by the United Kingdom (302 repositories) and France (116 repositories). Ukraine has only 2 data repositories indexed in re3data. The trend of relevance of data exchange is confirmed by the increase of publications with datasets for the last 10 years (2011-2020) in 5 times. Research institutions and universities are the main sources of research data, which are mainly focused on the fields of knowledge in chemistry (23.3%); biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology (13.8%); medicine (12.9%). An analysis of the latest thematic groups formed on the basis of publications with datasets shows that there is a significant correlation between publications with open source data and COVID-19 studies. More than 50% of publications with datasets both in Ukraine and around the world are aimed at achieving the goal of SDG 3 Good Health. Theoretical Implications: It is substantiated that in Ukraine there is a need to implement specific tactical and strategic plans for open science and open access to research data. Practical Implications: The results of the study can be used to support decision-making in the management of research data at the macro and micro levels. Future Research: It should be noted that the righteous bibliometric analysis of the state of the dissemination of data underlying the research results did not include the assessment of quality indicators and compliance with the FAIR principles, because accessibility and reusability are fundamental components of open science, which may be an area for further research. Moreover, it is advisable to investigate the degree of influence of the disclosure of the data underlying the research result on economic indicators, as well as indicators of ratings of higher education, etc. Research Limitations: Since publications with datasets in Scopus-indexed journals became the information base of the analysis for our study, it can be assumed that the dataset did not include publications with datasets published in editions that the Scopus bibliographic database does not cover. Paper type: Theoretical

scholarly journals FAIR and Open Research Metadata as Leverage for Digital Libraries: The Flemish Case

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sadia Vancauwenbergh
Keyword(s):  
Digital Libraries ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Digital Repository ◽  
Meta Data ◽  
Content Creation ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Content Consumption ◽  
Digital Objects

Since the advent of the digital age, academic libraries have been transforming from traditional libraries to digital libraries. While digitisation of published materials has been taking place in most libraries, research data is not yet a common good. However, in an era where the Open Science movement affectuates the modus operandi of the entire research ecosystem, it is paramount for digital libraries to include information on other digital objects such as research data. In fact, FAIR and Open research (meta)data can truly act as a leverage for digital libraries and broaden the scope of the library from a place for content consumption to a place for content creation. In order to take on this role, digital libraries must cooperate with ICT and the research community to ensure that the infrastructure is in place to store research (meta)data and that the librarians have the digital skill set for handling FAIR and Open research (meta)data. Throughout the chapter, we will elaborate on the essentials for creating a digital repository, with emphasis on the underlying metadata scheme using the Flemish application profile for research data as example. In addition, we will highlight the essential roles for operating digital libraries containing research data.

scholarly journals Why is getting credit for your data so hard?

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 01003
Author(s):  
Wouter Haak ◽  
Alberto Zigoni ◽  
Helen Kardinaal-de Mooij ◽  
Elena Zudilova-Seinstra
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Repository ◽  
Institutional Research ◽  
Public Research ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Institutional Repositories ◽  
Institutional Data ◽  
Research Organizations ◽  
Existing Data

Institutions, funding bodies, and national research organizations are pushing for more data sharing and FAIR data. Institutions typically implement data policies, frequently supported by an institutional data repository. Funders typically mandate data sharing. So where does this leave the researcher? How can researchers benefit from doing the additional work to share their data? In order to make sure that researchers and institutions get credit for sharing their data, the data needs to be tracked and attributed first. In this paper we investigated where the research data ended up for 11 research institutions, and how this data is currently tracked and attributed. Furthermore, we also analysed the gap between the research data that is currently in institutional repositories, and where their researchers truly share their data. We found that 10 out of 11 institutions have most of their public research data hosted outside of their own institution. Combined, they have 12% of their institutional research data published in the institutional data repositories. According to our data, the typical institution had 5% of their research data (median) published in the institutional repository, but there were 4 universities for which it was 10% or higher. By combining existing data-to-article graphs with existing article-to- researcher and article-to-institution graphs it becomes possible to increase tracking of public research data and therefore the visibility of researchers sharing their data typically by 17x. The tracking algorithm that was used to perform analysis and report on potential improvements has subsequently been implemented as a standard method in the Mendeley Data Monitor product. The improvement is most likely an under-estimate because, while the recall for datasets in institutional repositories is 100%, that is not the case for datasets published outside the institutions, so there are even more datasets still to be discovered.

scholarly journals Research Data Management Tools and Workflows: Experimental Work at the University of Porto

2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Cristina Ribeiro ◽  
João Rocha da Silva ◽  
João Aguiar Castro ◽  
Ricardo Carvalho Amorim ◽  
João Correia Lopes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Sensor Data ◽  
Preliminary Evaluation ◽  
Laboratory Notebook ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Long Tail ◽  
Management Platform ◽  
Research Data Management ◽  
The University

Research datasets include all kinds of objects, from web pages to sensor data, and originate in every domain. Concerns with data generated in large projects and well-funded research areas are centered on their exploration and analysis. For data in the long tail, the main issues are still how to get data visible, satisfactorily described, preserved, and searchable. Our work aims to promote data publication in research institutions, considering that researchers are the core stakeholders and need straightforward workflows, and that multi-disciplinary tools can be designed and adapted to specific areas with a reasonable effort. For small groups with interesting datasets but not much time or funding for data curation, we have to focus on engaging researchers in the process of preparing data for publication, while providing them with measurable outputs. In larger groups, solutions have to be customized to satisfy the requirements of more specific research contexts. We describe our experience at the University of Porto in two lines of enquiry. For the work with long-tail groups we propose general-purpose tools for data description and the interface to multi-disciplinary data repositories. For areas with larger projects and more specific requirements, namely wind infrastructure, sensor data from concrete structures and marine data, we define specialized workflows. In both cases, we present a preliminary evaluation of results and an estimate of the kind of effort required to keep the proposed infrastructures running.  The tools available to researchers can be decisive for their commitment. We focus on data preparation, namely on dataset organization and metadata creation. For groups in the long tail, we propose Dendro, an open-source research data management platform, and explore automatic metadata creation with LabTablet, an electronic laboratory notebook. For groups demanding a domain-specific approach, our analysis has resulted in the development of models and applications to organize the data and support some of their use cases. Overall, we have adopted ontologies for metadata modeling, keeping in sight metadata dissemination as Linked Open Data.

scholarly journals A survey of funders’ and institutions’ needs for understanding researchers’ open research practices

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iain Hrynaszkiewicz ◽  
Lauren Cadwallader
Keyword(s):  
Research Data ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Personal Contact ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Current State ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Level Of Satisfaction ◽  
Funding Agencies

A growing number of research-performing organisations (institutions) and funding agencies have policies that support open research practices -- sharing of research data, code and software. However, funders and institutions lack sufficient tools, time or resources to monitor compliance with these policies.To better understand funder and institution needs related to understanding open research practices of researchers, we targeted funders and institutions with a survey in 2020 and received 122 completed responses. Our survey assessed and scored, (from 0-100), the importance of and satisfaction with 17 factors associated with understanding open research practices. This includes things such as knowing if a research paper includes links to research data in a repository; knowing if a research grant made code available in a public repository; knowing if research data were made available in a reusable form; and knowing reasons why research data are not publicly available. Half of respondents had tried to evaluate researchers’ open research practices in the past and 78% plan to do this in the future. The most common method used to find out if researchers are practicing open research was personal contact with researchers and the most common reason for doing it was to increase their knowledge of researchers’ sharing practices (e.g. determine current state of sharing; track changes in practices over time; compare different departments/disciplines). The results indicate that nearly all of the 17 factors we asked about in the survey were underserved. The mean importance of all factors to respondents was 71.7, approaching the 75 threshold of “very important”. The average satisfaction of all factors was 41.3, indicating a negative level of satisfaction with ability to complete these tasks. The results imply an opportunity for better solutions to meet these needs.The growth of policies and requirements for making research data and code available does not appear to be matched with solutions for determining if these policies have been complied with. We conclude that publishers can better support some of the needs of funders and institutions by introducing simple solutions such as:-Mandatory data availability statements (DAS) in research articles -Not permitting generic “data available on request” statements-Enabling and encouraging the use of data repositories and other methods that make data available in a more reusable way-Providing visible links to research data on publications-Making information available on data and code sharing practices in publications available to institutions and funding agencies-Extending policies that require transparency in sharing of research data, to sharing of code

scholarly journals Frictionless Data: Making Research Data Quality Visible

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Fowler ◽  
Jo Barratt ◽  
Paul Walsh
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Data Quality ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Open Source Software ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Preparation ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Preparation Techniques ◽  
Ongoing Project

There is significant friction in the acquisition, sharing, and reuse of research data. It is estimated that eighty percent of data analysis is invested in the cleaning and mapping of data (Dasu and Johnson,2003). This friction hampers researchers not well versed in data preparation techniques from reusing an ever-increasing amount of data available within research data repositories. Frictionless Data is an ongoing project at Open Knowledge International focused on removing this friction. We are doing this by developing a set of tools, specifications, and best practices for describing, publishing, and validating data. The heart of this project is the “Data Package”, a containerization format for data based on existing practices for publishing open source software. This paper will report on current progress toward that goal.

scholarly journals Crosswalk among Prominent Open Research Data Repositories

Webology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 60-67
Author(s):  
Dr.M. Krishnamurthy ◽  
Dr. Bhalachandra S. Deshpande ◽  
Dr.C. Sajana
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Digital Repositories ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Global Movement ◽  
Access To Knowledge ◽  
Metadata Harvesting ◽  
Data Upload

Open Access is a synergised global movement using Internet to provide equal access to knowledge that once hid behind the subscription paywalls. Many new models for scholarly communication have emerged in recent past. One among them is institutional or digital repositories which archive the scholarly content of an organization. While the concept of Open Access opened new arena for institutional or digital repositories in the form of Open repositories. Likewise, the Open repositories for Research Data Management (RDM) are initiative to organize, store, cite, preserve, and share the collected data derived from the research. There are many multidisciplinary and subject specific open repositories for RDM offering exquisite features for perpetual management of research data. The objective of the present study is to evaluate features of popular Open Data Repositories-Zenodo, FigShare, Harvard Dataverse and Mendeley Data. The evaluation provided insights about the key features of the selected Open Data Repositories and which enable us to select the best among them. Zenodo provides maximum data upload limit. While the major features required by a researcher like DOI, File Types, citation support, licenses, search (metadata harvesting) are provided by all three repositories.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document