Archives des mots-clés : research data policies

Ouverture des données de recherche dans le domaine académique suisse : outils pour le choix d’une stratégie institutionnelle en matière de dépôt de données

Posté le par

Auteur/Author : Marielle Guirlet

Le contexte actuel de l’Open Science se traduit par des exigences d’ouverture des données de recherche. Le dépôt de données est un instrument crucial pour partager publiquement ces données.

Néanmoins, l’offre actuelle pléthorique et très diverse rend la sélection du dépôt difficile pour les chercheurs et les chercheuses. Pour les aider, leurs institutions d’affiliation émettent des recommandations pour le choix du meilleur dépôt. Elles proposent parfois aussi leur propre dépôt de données ou envisagent de le créer.

Cette étude, basée sur un travail de Master en sciences de l’information, s’intéresse à la démarche que les institutions académiques suisses peuvent suivre pour définir leur stratégie de soutien aux chercheurs et aux chercheuses en termes de dépôt.

Elle identifie aussi les informations qui vont aider ces institutions à choisir entre orienter ces chercheurs et ces chercheuses vers un dépôt existant (et lequel) et créer un nouveau dépôt, et aux spécifications que ce dépôt doit remplir.

Après avoir défini les concepts des données de recherche et des dépôts ouverts, les fonctionnalités, les outils et les services nécessaires à un dépôt pour mettre en œuvre le partage public de données sont discutés.

A partir des critères utilisés par la certification CoreTrustSeal pour évaluer la qualité d’un dépôt, et en tenant compte de ces fonctionnalités, de ces outils et ces services, un modèle de description d’un dépôt de données de recherche ouvertes est élaboré. Ce modèle peut être utilisé pour l’évaluation d’un dépôt existant ou pour la conception d’un nouveau dépôt.

Les stratégies de neuf institutions académiques suisses en matière de dépôt de données de recherche, dépôts utilisés et dépôts recommandés, sont analysées. Des recommandations sont formulées, sur la base des bonnes pratiques observées.

Des outils développés pour le choix de la meilleure stratégie en termes de dépôt de données de recherche ouvertes sont alors présentés. Un vade-mecum se présentant comme une liste de questions permet de collecter certaines informations utiles.

Un guide décisionnel accompagne l’institution dans sa réflexion et lui permet de choisir sa stratégie de façon éclairée, avec les informations collectées précédemment. Une fois cette stratégie choisie, des informations complémentaires et des recommandations sont disponibles pour sa mise en pratique.

Une version prototype de ces outils pour navigateur Internet est aussi présentée. Elle est adaptable à une évolution du contexte et transposable à d’autres pays.

URL : http://www.ressi.ch/num21/article182

A Review of Open Research Data Policies and Practices in China

Posté le par

Authors: Lili Zhang, Robert R. Downs, Jianhui Li, Liangming Wen, Chengzan Li

This paper initially conducts a literature review and content analysis of the open research data policies in China. Next, a series of exemplars describe data practices to promote and enable the use of open research data, including open data practices in research programs, data repositories, data journals, and citizen science.

Moreover, the top four driving forces are identified and analyzed along with their responsible guiding work. In addition, the “landscape of open research data ecology in China” is derived from the literature review and from observations of actual cases, where the interaction and mutual development of data policies, data programs, and data practices are recognized.

Finally, future trends of research data practices within China and internationally are discussed. We hope the analysis provides perspective on current open data practices in China along with insight into the need for additional research on scientific data sharing and management.

URL : A Review of Open Research Data Policies and Practices in China

DOI : http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2021-003

Implementing the RDA Research Data Policy Framework in Slovenian Scientific Journals

Posté le par

Authors: Janez Štebe, Maja Dolinar, Sonja Bezjak, Ana Inkret

The paper aims to present the implementation of the RDA research data policy framework in Slovenian scientific journals within the project RDA Node Slovenia. The activity aimed to implement the practice of data sharing and data citation in Slovenian scientific journals and was based on internationally renowned practices and policies, particularly the Research Data Policy Framework of the RDA Data Policy Standardization and Implementation Interest Group.

Following this, the RDA Node Slovenia coordination prepared a guidance document that allowed the four pilot participating journals (from fields of archaeology, history, linguistics and social sciences) to adjust their journal policies regarding data sharing, data citation, adapted the definitions of research data and suggested appropriate data repositories that suit their disciplinary specifics.

The comparison of results underlines how discipline-specific the aspects of data-sharing are. The pilot proved that a grass-root approach in advancing open science can be successful and well-received in the research community, however, it also pointed out several issues in scientific publishing that would benefit from a planned action on a national level.

The context of an underdeveloped data sharing culture, slow implementation of open data strategy by the national research funder and sparse national data service infrastructure creates a unique environment for this study, the result of which can be used in similar contexts worldwide.

URL : Implementing the RDA Research Data Policy Framework in Slovenian Scientific Journals

DOI : http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2020-049

Enforcing public data archiving policies in academic publishing: A study of ecology journals

Posté le par

Authors : Dan Sholler, Karthik Ram, Carl Boettiger, Daniel S Katz

To improve the quality and efficiency of research, groups within the scientific community seek to exploit the value of data sharing. Funders, institutions, and specialist organizations are developing and implementing strategies to encourage or mandate data sharing within and across disciplines, with varying degrees of success.

Academic journals in ecology and evolution have adopted several types of public data archiving policies requiring authors to make data underlying scholarly manuscripts freely available. The effort to increase data sharing in the sciences is one part of a broader “data revolution” that has prompted discussion about a paradigm shift in scientific research.

Yet anecdotes from the community and studies evaluating data availability suggest that these policies have not obtained the desired effects, both in terms of quantity and quality of available datasets.

We conducted a qualitative, interview-based study with journal editorial staff and other stakeholders in the academic publishing process to examine how journals enforce data archiving policies.

We specifically sought to establish who editors and other stakeholders perceive as responsible for ensuring data completeness and quality in the peer review process. Our analysis revealed little consensus with regard to how data archiving policies should be enforced and who should hold authors accountable for dataset submissions.

Themes in interviewee responses included hopefulness that reviewers would take the initiative to review datasets and trust in authors to ensure the completeness and quality of their datasets.

We highlight problematic aspects of these thematic responses and offer potential starting points for improvement of the public data archiving process.

URL : Enforcing public data archiving policies in academic publishing: A study of ecology journals

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951719836258

Reading the fine print: A review and analysis of business journals’ data sharing policies

Posté le par

Authors : Brianne Dosch, Tyler Martindale

Business librarians offer many data services to their researchers. These services are often focused more on discovery, visualization, and analysis than general data management. But, with the replication crisis facing many business disciplines, there is a need for business librarians to offer more data sharing and general data management support to their researchers.

To find evidence of this data need, 146 business journal’s data sharing policies were reviewed and analyzed to uncover meaningful trends in business research. Results of the study indicate data sharing is not mandated by business journals.

However, data sharing is often encouraged and recommended. This journal policy content analysis provides evidence that business researchers have opportunities to share their research data, and with the right data management support, business librarians can play a significant role in improving the data sharing behaviors of business researchers.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1080/08963568.2020.1847549

Data sharing policies of journals in life, health, and physical sciences indexed in Journal Citation Reports

Posté le par

Authors : Jihyun Kim, Soon Kim, Hye-Min Cho, Jae Hwa Chang, Soo Young Kim

Background

Many scholarly journals have established their own data-related policies, which specify their enforcement of data sharing, the types of data to be submitted, and their procedures for making data available.

However, except for the journal impact factor and the subject area, the factors associated with the overall strength of the data sharing policies of scholarly journals remain unknown.

This study examines how factors, including impact factor, subject area, type of journal publisher, and geographical location of the publisher are related to the strength of the data sharing policy.

Methods

From each of the 178 categories of the Web of Science’s 2017 edition of Journal Citation Reports, the top journals in each quartile (Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4) were selected in December 2018. Of the resulting 709 journals (5%), 700 in the fields of life, health, and physical sciences were selected for analysis.

Four of the authors independently reviewed the results of the journal website searches, categorized the journals’ data sharing policies, and extracted the characteristics of individual journals.

Univariable multinomial logistic regression analyses were initially conducted to determine whether there was a relationship between each factor and the strength of the data sharing policy.

Based on the univariable analyses, a multivariable model was performed to further investigate the factors related to the presence and/or strength of the policy.

Results

Of the 700 journals, 308 (44.0%) had no data sharing policy, 125 (17.9%) had a weak policy, and 267 (38.1%) had a strong policy (expecting or mandating data sharing). The impact factor quartile was positively associated with the strength of the data sharing policies.

Physical science journals were less likely to have a strong policy relative to a weak policy than Life science journals (relative risk ratio [RRR], 0.36; 95% CI [0.17–0.78]). Life science journals had a greater probability of having a weak policy relative to no policy than health science journals (RRR, 2.73; 95% CI [1.05–7.14]).

Commercial publishers were more likely to have a weak policy relative to no policy than non-commercial publishers (RRR, 7.87; 95% CI, [3.98–15.57]). Journals by publishers in Europe, including the majority of those located in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, were more likely to have a strong data sharing policy than a weak policy (RRR, 2.99; 95% CI [1.85–4.81]).

Conclusions

These findings may account for the increase in commercial publishers’ engagement in data sharing and indicate that European national initiatives that encourage and mandate data sharing may influence the presence of a strong policy in the associated journals.

Future research needs to explore the factors associated with varied degrees in the strength of a data sharing policy as well as more diverse characteristics of journals related to the policy strength.

URL : Data sharing policies of journals in life, health, and physical sciences indexed in Journal Citation Reports

DOI : https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9924

Research transparency promotion by surgical journals publishing randomised controlled trials: a survey

Posté le par

Authors : Nicolas Lombard, A. Gasmi, L. Sulpice, K. Boudjema, Damien Bergeat

Objective

To describe surgical journals’ position statements on data-sharing policies (primary objective) and to describe key features of their research transparency promotion.

Methods

Only “SURGICAL” journals with an impact factor higher than 2 (Web of Science) were eligible for the study. They were included, if there were explicit instructions for clinical trial publication in the official instructions for authors (OIA) or if they had published randomised controlled trial (RCT) between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2018.

The primary outcome was the existence of a data-sharing policy included in the instructions for authors. Data-sharing policies were grouped into 3 categories, inclusion of data-sharing policy mandatory, optional, or not available.

Details on research transparency promotion were also collected, namely the existence of a “prospective registration of clinical trials requirement policy”, a conflict of interests (COIs) disclosure requirement, and a specific reference to reporting guidelines, such as CONSORT for RCT.

Results

Among the 87 surgical journals identified, 82 were included in the study: 67 (82%) had explicit instructions for RCT and the remaining 15 (18%) had published at least one RCT. The median impact factor was 2.98 [IQR = 2.48–3.77], and in 2016 and 2017, the journals published a median of 11.5 RCT [IQR = 5–20.75].

The OIA of four journals (5%) stated that the inclusion of a data-sharing statement was mandatory, optional in 45% (n = 37), and not included in 50% (n = 41).

No association was found between journal characteristics and the existence of data-sharing policies (mandatory or optional). A “prospective registration of clinical trials requirement” was associated with International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) allusion or affiliation and higher impact factors.

Journals with specific RCT instructions in their OIA and journals referenced on the ICMJE website more frequently mandated the use of CONSORT guidelines.

Conclusion

Research transparency promotion is still limited in surgical journals. Standardisation of journal requirements according to ICMJE guidelines could be a first step forward for research transparency promotion in surgery.

URL : Research transparency promotion by surgical journals publishing randomised controlled trials: a survey

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04756-7