Open science can lead to greater collaboration, increased confidence in findings and goodwill between researchers.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01506-x
"The key ... is to practise “open science by design” ... For example, many researchers now keep data, computer code and other materials in web-based, interactive tools such as the popular Jupyter electronic notebook, which makes online archiving much easier."
"For early-career scientists who prefer producing data to managing it, Mons has this advice: “Go to a university that takes data stewardship seriously.”"
Showing posts with label data sharing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label data sharing. Show all posts
Wednesday, 15 May 2019
Monday, 20 August 2018
The need for science to focus on data sharing
From: http://sciencemeetsbusiness.com.au/nas-releases-open-science-report-claims-data-just-valuable-publication/?
The need for science to focus on data sharing
July 27, 2018
Should scientists’ incentives place as much emphasis on how openly available they make their data, as on the scholarly articles they publish?
The USA’s National Academies of Sciences (NAS) has released a new study that sheds light on the state of open science around the world. The report, Open Science by Design: Realizing a Vision for 21st Century Research, says different scientific disciplines are facing different issues, but all of them need to focus on data as much as publications. More....
Monday, 23 July 2018
"FAIR in practice" - Jisc report now available
To provide a better understanding of current practice with regard to the use of FAIR principles in the UK and the potential these have to enhance research operations and output, Jisc assigned work to Robert Allen and David Hartland of Hapsis Innovation Ltd. They worked in close collaboration with esteemed experts in the UK such as Simon Coles, Susanna Sansone and Melissa Terras and investigated practices and views in various research disciplines.
The results have now been published in the report ‘FAIR in practice - Jisc report on the Findable Accessible Interoperable and Reuseable Data Principles’, that can be found using DOI 10.5281/zenodo.1245567
A blog on the report, titled ‘Open science is all very well but how do you make it FAIR in practice?’ by Rachel Bruce and Bas Cordewener, is available here.
Monday, 16 July 2018
A funder-imposed data publication requirement seldom inspired data sharing - Plos article
Abstract
Growth of the open science movement has drawn significant attention to data sharing and availability across the scientific community. In this study, we tested the ability to recover data collected under a particular funder-imposed requirement of public availability. We assessed overall data recovery success, tested whether characteristics of the data or data creator were indicators of recovery success, and identified hurdles to data recovery. Overall the majority of data were not recovered (26% recovery of 315 data projects), a similar result to journal-driven efforts to recover data. Field of research was the most important indicator of recovery success, but neither home agency sector nor age of data were determinants of recovery. While we did not find a relationship between recovery of data and age of data, age did predict whether we could find contact information for the grantee. The main hurdles to data recovery included those associated with communication with the researcher; loss of contact with the data creator accounted for half (50%) of unrecoverable datasets, and unavailability of contact information accounted for 35% of unrecoverable datasets. Overall, our results suggest that funding agencies and journals face similar challenges to enforcement of data requirements. We advocate that funding agencies could improve the availability of the data they fund by dedicating more resources to enforcing compliance with data requirements, providing data-sharing tools and technical support to awardees, and administering stricter consequences for those who ignore data sharing preconditions.
Thursday, 7 June 2018
Ten reasons to share your data
Making data available to the larger scientific community has many benefits.
27 April 2018
By Amanda S. Barnard
Nature Index:
Nature Index:
Thursday, 3 May 2018
It’s So UnFAIR!
EOS - Earth & Space Science News
Ankur Rashmikant Desai 02-05-18
Fluxnet is a global network of eddy covariance (EC) flux measurements on carbon and water exchanges with the land surface. Dai et al. [2018] conducted a meta-analysis of EC publications, authors, citation metrics, and accessibility of EC data.
The more likely one shared data, the more likely one was a more influential researcher.
The endgame is science that is reproducible and extensible.
The exercise demonstrated that the benefits of sharing data do outweigh the costs for both the providers and the users.
https://eos.org/editors-vox/its-so-unfair
"China asserts firm grip on research data"
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/04/china-asserts-firm-grip-research-data
"In a move few scientists anticipated, the Chinese government has decreed that all scientific data generated in China must be submitted to government-sanctioned data centers before appearing in publications. At the same time, the regulations, posted last week, call for open access and data sharing."
"In a move few scientists anticipated, the Chinese government has decreed that all scientific data generated in China must be submitted to government-sanctioned data centers before appearing in publications. At the same time, the regulations, posted last week, call for open access and data sharing."
Tuesday, 1 May 2018
The debate has just started
"Soft terms like 'open' and 'sharing' don't tell the true story of your data"
http://theconversation.com/soft-terms-like-open-and-sharing-dont-tell-the-true-story-of-your-data-95521
Thursday, 26 April 2018
CarnegieUK released new report on Data for Public Benefit
‘Data for Public Benefit’ published jointly by Involve, the Carnegie UK Trust and Understanding Patient Data presents new research which highlights there are big differences in how public services define public benefit and risk with regards to data sharing. We’ve developed a framework to help organisations better evaluate these benefits and risks. This framework will help professionals weigh up the purpose of sharing data against the potential for harm and help public service providers have conversations with the public about data sharing.
Wednesday, 28 March 2018
Monday, 26 March 2018
Tuesday, 27 February 2018
Medical Technology Leaders to Discuss Open Data During World Patient Safety, Science & Technology Summit
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180221005514/en/Medical-Technology-Leaders-Discuss-Open-Data-World
“People are dying because of the lack of data sharing –algorithms that can warn clinicians and help them with decision making can’t be used because data from medical devices and electronic medical records have historically been walled by the manufacturers.”
"The first challenge is how to get competing MedTech companies like Philips, Medtronic, Masimo and GE to work together on interoperability? The solution is through Open Data Pledges to amass data collected by various medical devices. Data sharing is the key along with protections for patient privacy, but the prize remains patient safety. The information is there, ready for any company or entrepreneur to figure out a way to take “interoperability and with it predictive algorithms and decision support” from concept to reality."
“People are dying because of the lack of data sharing –algorithms that can warn clinicians and help them with decision making can’t be used because data from medical devices and electronic medical records have historically been walled by the manufacturers.”
"The first challenge is how to get competing MedTech companies like Philips, Medtronic, Masimo and GE to work together on interoperability? The solution is through Open Data Pledges to amass data collected by various medical devices. Data sharing is the key along with protections for patient privacy, but the prize remains patient safety. The information is there, ready for any company or entrepreneur to figure out a way to take “interoperability and with it predictive algorithms and decision support” from concept to reality."
Friday, 16 February 2018
Taylor & Francis introduces new data sharing policies
"Taylor & Francis introduces a suite of new data sharing policies to drive open scholarship forwards and help the research communities we work with achieve their goals."
From this Taylor & Francis press release.
From this Taylor & Francis press release.
Monday, 20 November 2017
Data Sharing from Clinical Trials — A Research Funder’s Perspective. New England Journal of Medicine
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsb1708278
N Engl J Med 2017; 377:1990-1992November 16, 2017DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsb1708278
"The Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation share a common vision for maximizing the value of data that are generated through the trials we fund. We are committed to ensuring that the data from published clinical trials can be accessed by researchers so they can validate key findings, stimulate further inquiry, and ultimately deliver lifesaving results."
"As funders of medical research, we recognize the importance of the appropriate sharing of clinical-trial data for reasons of transparency, good practice, and accelerated dissemination of results to the broader community. There is now a clear consensus that the results of all clinical trials must be reported in a timely manner, as set out in a joint statement by the World Health Organization regarding public disclosure of results from clinical trials.4 In addition, all our organizations have implemented data-sharing policies requiring that the data from studies we have funded will be made available to other researchers at the time of publication. This requirement applies equally to clinical trials.
These policies, however, do not mean that such data have to be openly available for anyone to access on the Web. We fully recognize that some data — and especially clinical-trial data — may contain sensitive, personal information about research participants, and these data need to be shared in a manner that protects participants’ privacy and confidentiality and respects the terms under which they consented to take part in the study. Such an approach might include the use of managed-access procedures, whereby requests to access data are reviewed by an independent committee, and of data-access agreements that place appropriate restrictions on how the data may be used."
Tuesday, 7 November 2017
Wednesday, 1 November 2017
Whose Data Are They Anyway? Can a Patient Perspective Advance the Data-Sharing Debate?
"the patients who participated in the recent Journal summit on aligning incentives for data sharing want their data shared quickly, especially to ensure that other patients know about possible side effects. But they also want some control over how the data are shared. For example, they would be more hesitant to participate if commercial or other interests were involved — for instance, if health care systems wanted to use the data to decide whether to provide care to certain groups or if drug or insurance companies had a commercial interest in them."
Sunday, 1 October 2017
Wednesday, 27 September 2017
Friday, 15 September 2017
Wiley announces new Data Sharing and Citation policies to improve transparency in research
HOBOKEN, NJ—September 14, 2017— John Wiley and Sons, Inc. (NYSE:JWa) (NYSE:JWb), today announced the launch of new data sharing and citation policies that will be implemented across all participating Wiley journals. Sharing data enables researchers to reuse experimental results and supports the creation of new work built on previous findings. These new policies will improve the efficiencies of the research process supporting the critical goals of transparency and reproducibility.
Tuesday, 1 August 2017
Pharmaceutical companies’ policies on access to trial data, results, and methods: audit study
Pharmaceutical companies’ policies on access to trial data, results, and methods: audit study
BMJ 2017; 358 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j3334 (Published 26 July 2017)Cite this as: BMJ 2017;358:j3334- Individual patient data (IPD) is the raw data collected during a clinical trial, with detailed information on each individual participant. As such it presents important opportunities for research—for example, by allowing third parties to verify trialists’ initial analyses; permitting meta-analysis of pooled IPD for more accurate point estimates of benefits; giving greater power for subgroup analyses; and allowing new hypotheses to be explored in existing data, including on abandoned products and treatments.262728 However, it also presents a risk of re-identification of pseudonymised participants. Because of this, IPD is not generally posted in public but shared through various controlled access mechanisms, as with other forms of rich electronic health record data used by epidemiologists.
"22 companies (96%) had a policy to share IPD; 14 included phase IV trials (one included trials on unlicensed medicines and off-label uses)"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)