Archives des mots-clés : research data

Pour une cohabitation profitable : problématiques et enjeux des liens entre missions archives et SCD au sein de l’université

Posté le par

Auteur/Author : Antoine Boustany

Ce mémoire porte sur les liens entre les services communs de la documentation et les services d’archives des universités. Bibliothécaires et archivistes se côtoient depuis quelques années dans la majorité des établissements d’enseignement supérieur et de recherche, et la nature de leurs relations varie de manière importante d’une institution à l’autre.

Aujourd’hui se développent de nouveaux domaines de travail pour ces professionnels de la documentation, notamment dans le domaine des services aux chercheurs, ainsi que de la gestion et de la valorisation des données de la recherche. Peut-on concevoir des modalités concrètes de collaboration entre l’archiviste et le bibliothécaire, en s’appuyant sur les réflexions au sujet de la convergence des deux métiers, mais aussi sur les réalités du travail en université ?

Après avoir présenté les grands enjeux liés à l’archivage en université, on cherchera à présenter des points de convergence spécifiques entre les deux professions, pour dégager des axes de travail en commun.

URL : Pour une cohabitation profitable : problématiques et enjeux des liens entre missions archives et SCD au sein de l’université

Original location : https://www.enssib.fr/bibliotheque-numerique/notices/70131-pour-une-cohabitation-profitable-problematiques-et-enjeux-des-liens-entre-missions-archives-et-scd-au-sein-de-l-universite

Dissimuler ou disséminer ? Une étude sur le sort réservé aux résultats négatifs

Posté le par

Auteures/Authors : Marie-Emilia Herbet, Jérémie Leonard, Maria Santangelo, Lucie Albaret

Une enquête composée de 34 questions a été adressée à des chercheurs en chimie, physique, sciences de l’ingénieur et de l’environnement, en vue d’identifier leur rapport aux résultats de recherche infructueux ainsi que les freins et les leviers de leur diffusion.

L’étude se fonde sur 310 réponses complètes émanant de participants affiliés à des établissements de recherche et d’enseignement français. Menée dans le cadre du projet Datacc, porté par les bibliothèques universitaires de Lyon et Grenoble Alpes, engagées dans l’accompagnement des chercheurs à l’ouverture des données de recherche, notre étude permet de combler le déficit de données sur le sujet au regard des disciplines concernées.

Elle relève que 81% des chercheurs interrogés ont déjà produit des résultats négatifs pertinents et 75% se disent prêts à publier ce type de données. Pourtant, seuls 12,5% des répondants ont déjà eu l’occasion de le faire dans une revue scientifique. Ce contraste béant entre l’intention et la pratique soulève des interrogations sur les obstacles en présence et les solutions potentielles à apporter.

URL : Dissimuler ou disséminer ? Une étude sur le sort réservé aux résultats négatifs

Original location : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03371040

FAIR Forever? Accountabilities and Responsibilities in the Preservation of Research Data

Posté le par

Author : Amy Currie, William Kilbride

Digital preservation is a fast-moving and growing community of practice of ubiquitous relevance, but in which capability is unevenly distributed. Within the open science and research data communities, digital preservation has a close alignment to the FAIR principles and is delivered through a complex specialist infrastructure comprising technology, staff and policy.

However, capacity erodes quickly, establishing a need for ongoing examination and review to ensure that skills, technology, and policy remain fit for changing purpose. To address this challenge, the Digital Preservation Coalition (DPC) conducted the FAIR Forever study, commissioned by the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) Sustainability Working Group and funded by the EOSC Secretariat Project in 2020, to assess the current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to the preservation of research data across EOSC, and the feasibility of establishing shared approaches, workflows and services that would benefit EOSC stakeholders.

This paper draws from the FAIR Forever study to document and explore its key findings on the identified strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to the preservation of FAIR data in EOSC, and to the preservation of research data more broadly.

It begins with background of the study and an overview of the methodology employed, which involved a desk-based assessment of the emerging EOSC vision, interviews with representatives of EOSC stakeholders, and focus groups with digital preservation specialists and data managers in research organizations.

It summarizes key findings on the need for clarity on digital preservation in the EOSC vision and for elucidation of roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities to mitigate risks of data loss, reputation, and sustainability. It then outlines the recommendations provided in the final report presented to the EOSC Sustainability Working Group.

To better ensure that research data can be FAIRer for longer, the recommendations of the study are presented with discussion on how they can be extended and applied to various research data stakeholders in and outside of EOSC, and suggest ways to bring together research data curation, management, and preservation communities to better ensure FAIRness now and in the long term.

URL : FAIR Forever? Accountabilities and Responsibilities in the Preservation of Research Data

DOI : https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v16i1.768

Do I-PASS for FAIR? Measuring the FAIR-ness of Research Organizations

Posté le par

Authors : Jacquelijn Ringersma, Margriet Miedema

Given the increased use of the FAIR acronym as adjective for other contexts than data or data sets, the Dutch National Coordination Point for Research Data Management initiated a Task Group to work out the concept of a FAIR research organization.

The results of this Task Groups are a definition of a FAIR enabling organization and a method to measure the FAIR-ness of a research organization (The Do-I-PASS for FAIR method). The method can also aid in developing FAIR-enabling Road Maps for individual research institutions and at a national level.

This practice paper describes the development of the method and provides a couple of use cases for the application of the method in daily research data management practices in research organizations.

URL : Do I-PASS for FAIR? Measuring the FAIR-ness of Research Organizations

DOI : http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2021-030

L’ouverture des matériaux de recherche ethnographiques en question

Posté le par

Auteur-e-s/Authors : Florence Revelin, Alix Levain, Morgane Mignon, Marianne Noel, Betty Queffelec, Pascal Raux, Hervé Squividant

Le mouvement d’ouverture des données scientifiques constitue, pour les sciences humaines et sociales (SHS), un défi à la fois épistémologique, juridique, éthique et technique. Il se manifeste par des normes et injonctions multiples vis-à-vis des communautés de recherche, qui peinent à s’y conformer et à se saisir des instruments mis à leur disposition.

Le projet PARDOQ vise à rendre intelligibles les implications complexes de ce mouvement pour les communautés travaillant à partir de données qualitatives (ethnographiques), à travers l’analyse de l’expérience de chercheuses et chercheurs confronté.e.s à la tension entre partage et protection des données ethnographiques, en prenant appui d’une part sur une étude de cas (le programme de recherche interdisciplinaire Parchemins) et d’autre part sur une enquête auprès de chercheurs.euses pratiquant l’ethnographie et de membres de réseaux scientifiques, techniques et juridiques d’appui et à la recherche.

URL : L’ouverture des matériaux de recherche ethnographiques en question

Original location : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03238067

Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review

Posté le par

Authors : Christian Ohmann, David Moher, Maximilian Siebert, Edith Motschall, Florian Naudet

Objectives

To explore the impact of data-sharing initiatives on the intent to share data, on actual data sharing, on the use of shared data and on research output and impact of shared data.

Eligibility criteria

All studies investigating data-sharing practices for individual participant data (IPD) from clinical trials.

Sources of evidence

We searched the Medline database, the Cochrane Library, the Science Citation Index Expanded and the Social Sciences Citation Index via Web of Science, and preprints and proceedings of the International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication.

In addition, we inspected major clinical trial data-sharing platforms, contacted major journals/publishers, editorial groups and some funders.

Charting methods

Two reviewers independently extracted information on methods and results from resources identified using a standardised questionnaire. A map of the extracted data was constructed and accompanied by a narrative summary for each outcome domain.

Results

93 studies identified in the literature search (published between 2001 and 2020, median: 2018) and 5 from additional information sources were included in the scoping review. Most studies were descriptive and focused on early phases of the data-sharing process. While the willingness to share IPD from clinical trials is extremely high, actual data-sharing rates are suboptimal.

A survey of journal data suggests poor to moderate enforcement of the policies by publishers. Metrics provided by platforms suggest that a large majority of data remains unrequested. When requested, the purpose of the reuse is more often secondary analyses and meta-analyses, rarely re-analyses. Finally, studies focused on the real impact of data-sharing were rare and used surrogates such as citation metrics.

Conclusions

There is currently a gap in the evidence base for the impact of IPD sharing, which entails uncertainties in the implementation of current data-sharing policies. High level evidence is needed to assess whether the value of medical research increases with data-sharing practices.

URL : Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review

Original location : https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/8/e049228

Open research data repositories: Practices, norms, and metadata for sharing images

Posté le par

Authors : Karin Hansson, Anna Dahlgren

Open research data repositories are promoted as one of the cornerstones in the open research paradigm, promoting collaboration, interoperability, and large-scale sharing and reuse. There is, however, a lack of research investigating what these sharing platforms actually share and a more critical interface analysis of the norms and practices embedded in this datafication of academic practice is needed.

This article takes image data sharing in the humanities as a case study for investigating the possibilities and constraints in 5 open research data repositories. By analyzing the visual and textual content of the interface along with the technical means for metadata, the study shows how the platforms are differentiated in terms of signifiers of research paradigms, but that beneath the rhetoric of the interface, they are designed in a similar way, which does not correspond well with the image researchers’ need for detailed metadata.

Combined with the problem of copyright limitations, these data-sharing tools are simply not sophisticated enough when it comes to sharing and reusing images. The result also corresponds with previous research showing that these tools are used not so much for sharing research data, but more for promoting researcher personas.

URL : Open research data repositories: Practices, norms, and metadata for sharing images

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24571