Category Archives: oa.data

Biomedical supervisors’ role modeling of open science practices | eLife

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract:  Supervision is one important way to socialize Ph.D. candidates into open and responsible research. We hypothesized that one should be more likely to identify open science practices (here publishing open access and sharing data) in empirical publications that were part of a Ph.D. thesis when the Ph.D. candidates’ supervisors engaged in these practices compared to those whose supervisors did not or less often did. Departing from thesis repositories at four Dutch University Medical centers, we included 211 pairs of supervisors and Ph.D. candidates, resulting in a sample of 2062 publications. We determined open access status using UnpaywallR and Open Data using Oddpub, where we also manually screened publications with potential open data statements. Eighty-three percent of our sample was published openly, and 9% had open data statements. Having a supervisor who published open access more often than the national average was associated with an odds of 1.99 to publish open access. However, this effect became nonsignificant when correcting for institutions. Having a supervisor who shared data was associated with 2.22 (CI:1.19–4.12) times the odds to share data compared to having a supervisor that did not. This odds ratio increased to 4.6 (CI:1.86–11.35) after removing false positives. The prevalence of open data in our sample was comparable to international studies; open access rates were higher. Whilst Ph.D. candidates spearhead initiatives to promote open science, this study adds value by investigating the role of supervisors in promoting open science.

 

WHO releases data.who.int

Posted on by
Reply

“For 75 years, the World Health Organization (WHO) has been dedicated to promoting health, keeping the world safe and serving the vulnerable. The use of data as the foundation for evidence-based decision-making has been central to WHO’s mission. Today, there are more opportunities than ever to harness the power of data. Yet progress is uneven, with global disparities in capacity for health data collection, communication and access. The COVID-19 pandemic has magnified the urgent need for the public and policymakers to have access to timely, robust and reliable data.

Recognizing these challenges, WHO is proud to announce a transformative digital platform, data.who.int, a one-stop shop for health data. Data.who.int fulfills WHO’s commitment to provide health data as a public good; it is powered by the ambitious technologies of WHO’s World Health Data Hub, delivering an end-to-end solution for WHO data processes. From collection to use, the World Health Data Hub provides a world class experience leveraging innovative technology to address data challenges….”

Dryad in the community: Responding to the Nelson Memo: repository re-curation for open scienceDryad news

Posted on by
Reply

“Available to watch now: “Responding to the Nelson Memo: repository re-curation for open science”.

This talk introduces the concept of re-curation with examples from three different types of repositories and research organisations; generalist, institutional, and field stations. Re-curation is the care and feeding of digital content over time, ensuring it remains discoverable, interoperable, and reusable and aligned with the latest standards.

Learn from Dryad partner Ted Habermann of Metadata Gamechangers about the importance of continually improving metadata to support discovery and reuse as standards emerge and evolve.”

Predicting psychologists’ approach to academic reciprocity and data sharing with a theory of collective action | Emerald Insight

Posted on by
Reply

“This study found that data sharing among psychologists is driven primarily by their perceptions of community benefits, academic reciprocity and the norms of data sharing. This study also found that academic reciprocity is significantly influenced by psychologists’ perceptions of community benefits, academic reputation and the norms of data sharing. Both academic reputation and academic reciprocity are affected by psychologists’ prior experiences with data reuse. Additionally, psychologists’ perceptions of community benefits and the norms of data sharing are significantly affected by the perception of their academic reputation.”

(Why) Are Open Research Practices the Future for the Study of Language Learning? – Marsden – Language Learning – Wiley Online Library

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract:  Open research practices are relevant to all stages of research, from conceptualization through dissemination. Here, we discuss key facets of open research, highlighting its rationales, infrastructures, behaviors, and challenges. Part I conceptualizes open research and its rationales. Part II identifies challenges such as the speed and cost of open research, the usability of open data and materials, the difficulties of conducting replication research, and the economics and sustainability of open access and open research generally. In discussing these challenges, we have sought to provide examples of good practice, describe and evaluate emerging innovations, and envision change. Part III considers ongoing coevolutions of culture, infrastructure, and behaviors and acknowledges the limitations of our review and of open research practices. We argue that open research is indeed a large part of our future, and most—if not all—challenges are surmountable, but doing so requires significant changes for many aspects of the research process.

Knowledge Bites #15 : How to integrate an Open Science service or data-source into the EOSC portal? – EELISA

Posted on by
Reply

“European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) offers researchers, innovators, companies and the general public a federated and open multi-disciplinary environment. Using the e-infrastructure of this environment, users can publish, search and reuse data-sets, various tools and services for research, innovation and education. Data and related services in EOSC are established on FAIR principles.

In this presentation, we will give a short introduction to EOSC and show the process by which the providers – organizations like universities – of services can register themselves and then onboard their respective services. Some of the examples of such services will be shown. We will also present the benefits that the users of the EOSC gain by using the tools and e-infrastructure of the EOSC….”

Open to Complexity: Symposium on Open Science in the Social Sciences and Humanities | Tilburg University

Posted on by
Reply

“Open research practices are encouraged in academia today. Research needs to become more ‘open’ for interaction with stakeholders within and outside the protective walls of the university. For many fields, it is becoming clear what this practically entails: immediately start sharing hypotheses, data, codes, and research design.

But is it possible to practice Open Science when your academic discipline is not immediately associated with hypotheses, confirmatory statistics, and formulas? And how can open research practices be embraced while taking into account the potentially unintended yet harmful consequences? We intend to answer these questions at a one-day symposium for which any interested researcher or policy officer, at and outside of Tilburg, is invited to present or attend.

Open Science handbooks do not really address what happens in culture studies, history, law, theology, anthropology, communication studies, data science, philosophy and other disciplines. In these qualitative, exploratory fields with mixed method approaches, inquiry centers not so much on fixed hypotheses, data, or code ? which can easily be shared. These modes of inquiry traditionally have a bigger emphasis on exploring ideas, interpretation, argumentation, comparison, and critical thinking. The ‘material’ or ‘data’ of this kind of research seems almost too subjective and slippery to share before the final book or article is written. But is it?

We think that the social sciences and humanities (SSH) could benefit from a more transparent way of working. Therefore, we want to scrutinize how explorative research is done in these disciplines and how they are also able to integrate Open Science principles. Moreover, the reflexive nature of these disciplines provides ample reason to carefully considers the risks of opening up research. How can academics do so in a responsible way?”

A Pilot Study to Locate Historic Scientific Data in a University Archive | Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract:  Historic data in analog (or print) format is a valuable resource that is utilized by scientists in many fields. This type of data may be found in various locations on university campuses including offices, labs, storage facilities, and archives. This study investigates whether biological data held in one institutional university archives could be identified, described, and thus made potentially useful for contemporary life scientists. Scientific data was located and approximately half of it was deemed to be of some value to current researchers and about 20% included enough information for the study to be repeated. Locating individual data sets in the collections at the University Archives at the University of Minnesota proved challenging. This preliminary work points to possible ways to move forward to make raw data in university archives collections more discoverable and likely to be reused. It raises questions that can help inform future work in this area.

 

Project TARA | DORA

Posted on by
Reply

“Project TARA is supported by a generous three-year grant from Arcadia, a charitable fund of Lisbet Rausing and Peter Baldwin. It will help DORA identify, understand, and make visible the criteria and standards universities use to make hiring, promotion, and tenure decisions. This information will be used to create resources and practical guidance on research assessment reform for academic and scholarly institutions.”

Library unveils revamped digital repository | Georgia Tech Library

Posted on by
Reply

“Today the Library is proud to unveil its revamped digital repository to the Georgia Tech community. Visit https://repository.gatech.edu to explore the site. 

The Georgia Tech Digital Repository collects, preserves, and expands access to the unique digital collections of immediate and long-term value to Georgia Tech and the global community. The site brings together scholarship, archives, and special collections and features persistent landing pages for Georgia Tech publications, authors, advisors, and units.

In addition, the revamped repository offers enhancements to support the Library’s open scholarship and digital archives offerings and functionality for integration with campus systems and data initiatives, including persistent identifiers….”

Data Rivers: Carving Out the Public Domain in the Age of Generative AI by Sylvie Delacroix :: SSRN

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract:  The salient question, today, is not whether ‘copyright law [will] allow robots to learn’. The pressing question is whether the fragile data ecosystem that makes generative AI possible can be re-balanced through intervention that is timely enough. The threats to this ecosystem come from multiple fronts. They are comparable in kind to the threats currently affecting ‘water rivers’ across the globe.

First, just as the fundamental human right to water is only possible if ‘reasonable use’ and reciprocity constraints are imposed on the economic exploitation of rivers, so is the fundamental right to access culture, learn and build upon it. It is that right -and the moral aspirations underlying it- that has led millions to share their creative works under ‘open’ licenses. Generative AI tools would not have been possible without access to that rich, high-quality content. Yet few of those tools respect the reciprocity expectations without which the Creative Commons and Open-Source movements cease to be sustainable. The absence of internationally coordinated standards to systematically identify AI-generated content also threatens our ‘data rivers’ with irreversible pollution.

Second, the process that has allowed large corporations to seize control of data and its definition as an asset subject to property rights has effectively enabled the construction of hard structures -canals or dams- that has led to the rights of many of those lying up-or downstream of such structures to be ignored. While data protection laws seek to address those power imbalances by granting ‘personal’ data rights, the exercise of those rights remains demanding, just as it is challenging for artists to defend their IP rights in the face of AI-generated works that threaten them with redundancy.

To tackle the above threats, the long overdue reform of copyright can only be part of the required intervention. Equally important is the construction of bottom-up empowerment infrastructure that gives long term agency to those wishing to share their data and/or creative works. This infrastructure would also play a central role in reviving much-needed democratic engagement. Data not only carries traces of our past. It is also a powerful tool to envisage different futures. There is no doubt that tools such as GPT4 will change us. We would be fools to believe we may leverage those tools at the service of a variety of futures by merely imposing sets of ‘post-hoc’ regulatory constraints.

Rapid, accurate publication and dissemination of clinical trial results: benefits and challenges | European Heart Journal | Oxford Academic

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract:  Large-scale clinical trials are essential in cardiology and require rapid, accurate publication, and dissemination. Whereas conference presentations, press releases, and social media disseminate information quickly and often receive considerable coverage by mainstream and healthcare media, they lack detail, may emphasize selected data, and can be open to misinterpretation. Preprint servers speed access to research manuscripts while awaiting acceptance for publication by a journal, but these articles are not formally peer-reviewed and sometimes overstate the findings. Publication of trial results in a major journal is very demanding but the use of existing checklists can help accelerate the process. In case of rejection, procedures such as easing formatting requirements and possibly carrying over peer-review to other journals could speed resubmission. Secondary publications can help maximize benefits from clinical trials; publications of secondary endpoints and subgroup analyses further define treatment effects and the patient populations most likely to benefit. These rely on data access, and although data sharing is becoming more common, many challenges remain. Beyond publication in medical journals, there is a need for wider knowledge dissemination to maximize impact on clinical practice. This might be facilitated through plain language summary publications. Social media, websites, mainstream news outlets, and other publications, although not peer-reviewed, are important sources of medical information for both the public and for clinicians. This underscores the importance of ensuring that the information is understandable, accessible, balanced, and trustworthy. This report is based on discussions held on December 2021, at the 18th Global Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists meeting, involving a panel of editors of some of the top medical journals, as well as members of the lay press, industry, and clinical trialists.

 

Frontiers | Editorial: Data science and artificial intelligence for (better) science

Posted on by
Reply

“Meaningful and explainable AI in research can only be fulfilled when as much data as possible is made FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable). How meaning is communicated in science “as precisely as possible” to machines when we formulate scientific concepts is a key question. Machine readability and interpretability is needed in order to make data and information “Fully AI-Ready” and support data-intensive research (Schultes et al.). The future of science is where there is only “one computer” and FAIR services see all FAIR data and effectively access a global FAIR database….

Finally, the question is how to enable (better) open science. Increasingly relevant today than ever before is the greater reliance on access to data, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML). Data access increasingly determines scientific discoveries and advancements. Data reuse is at the forefront of an emerging “third wave of open data” (Verhulst et al., 2020). But despite progress in implementing open data and FAIR principles, science data asymmetries (as in disparities in access to science data) are a growing problem and can undermine scientific progress. Comparative research is needed to document (Verhulst and Young) for instance, investigating the creation of new types of data asymmetries by, e.g., new private-sector investments in data platforms and knowledge repositories, how data portability and interoperability impact the practice of data collaboration, the relationship and interplay between existing asymmetries and technological and societal drivers. Finally, new methods for achieving a social license for data use and reuse toward the public good are needed, capturing multiple stakeholders’ acceptance of standard practices and procedures.”

English – Knowledge Equity Network

Posted on by
Reply

“For Higher Education Institutions

Publish a Knowledge Equity Statement for your institution by 2025, incorporating tangible commitments aligned with the principles and objectives below.
Commit to institutional action(s) to support a sustained increase of published educational material being open and freely accessible for all to use and reuse for teaching, learning, and research.
Commit to institutional action(s) to support a sustained increase of new research outputs being transparent, open and freely accessible for all, and which meet the expectations of funders.
Use openness as an explicit criteria in reaching hiring, tenure, and promotion decisions. Reward and recognise open practices across both research and research-led education. This should include the importance of interdisciplinary and/or collaborative activities, and the contribution of all individuals to activities.
Define Equity, Diversity and Inclusion targets that will contribute towards open and inclusive Higher Education practices, and report annually on progress against these targets.
To create new mechanisms in and between Higher Education Institutions that allow for further widening participation and increased diversity of staff and student populations.
Review the support infrastructure for open Higher Education, and invest in the human, technical, and digital infrastructure that is needed to make open Higher Education a success.
Promote the use of open interoperability principles for any research or education software/system that you procure or develop, explicitly highlighting the option of making all or parts of content open for public consumption.
Ensure that all research data conforms to the FAIR Data Principles: ‘findable’, accessible, interoperable, and re-useable.

For Funding Agencies

Publish a statement that open dissemination of research findings is a critical component in evaluating the productivity and integrity of research.
Incorporate open research practices into assessment of funding proposals.
Incentivise the adoption of Open Research through policies, frameworks and mandates that require open access for publications, data, and other outputs, with as liberal a licence as possible for maximum reuse.
Actively manage funding schemes to support open infrastructures and open dissemination of research findings, educational resources, and underpinning data.
Explicitly define reward and recognition mechanisms for globally co-produced and co-delivered open educational resources that benefit society….”

 

Increasing access to open access books: SPARC Europe joins Open Book Futures (OBF) project | STM Publishing News

Posted on by
Reply

We are pleased to announce our participation in the recently launched Open Book Futures (OBF) project, funded by Arcadia and the Research England Development (RED) Fund.

Open Access (OA) publishing has transformed how scholars and the wider public access academic content. However, despite the many benefits of OA, the number of OA books published each year is still relatively low compared to OA journal articles. In response to this challenge, the OBF project was launched with the intention of significantly increasing and improving the quantity, discoverability, and accessibility of academic content, ensuring it is freely and easily available to not only scholars but also the general public. The intention is to build on the pioneering work conducted within the Community-led Open Publication Infrastructures for Monographs (COPIM) project. 

SPARC Europe’s role in OBF

SPARC Europe will contribute to the OBF project in various ways: 

We bring our experience establishing and running The Global Sustainability Coalition for Open Science Services (SCOSS) and our connections to Invest in Open Infrastructure to advise the project. The Open Book Collective Development Fund’s grant allocation work will address a gap in the funding landscape by offering financial support to smaller and newer OA book initiatives, and we look forward to supporting this effort.
We will contribute directly to the outreach work being conducted by Work Package 2, on behalf of the Open Book Collective, and Work Package 3, on behalf of the Opening the Future revenue model. 
Specifically, we will raise awareness of this important initiative and explore new opportunities for OA books to build a more sustainable infrastructure for OA books.

We are excited about the challenges that lie ahead for OBF. Our contribution will help initiate a step change in the ambition, scope, and impact of community-led OA book publishing. Together, we will improve the quantity, discoverability, and accessibility of long-form publications ensuring they are freely and easily available to scholars and the wider public. 

You can read more about the project here and stay informed by regularly checking our news page.