Data Repository Selection: Criteria That Matter – Request For Comments – F1000 Blogs

“Publishers and journals are developing data policies to ensure that datasets, as well as other digital products associated with articles, are deposited and made accessible via appropriate repositories, also in line with the FAIR Principles. With thousands of options available, however, the lists of deposition repositories recommended by publishers are often different and consequently the guidance provided to authors may vary from journal to journal. This is due to a lack of common criteria used to select the data repositories, but also to the fact that there is still no consensus of what constitutes a good data repository. 

To tackle this, FAIRsharing and DataCite have joined forces with a group of publisher representatives (authors of this work) who are actively implementing data policies and recommending data repositories to researchers. The result of our work is a set of proposed criteria that journals and publishers believe are important for the identification and selection of data repositories, which can be recommended to researchers when they are preparing to publish the data underlying their findings. …”

Data Repository Selection: Criteria That Matter – Request For Comments – F1000 Blogs

“Publishers and journals are developing data policies to ensure that datasets, as well as other digital products associated with articles, are deposited and made accessible via appropriate repositories, also in line with the FAIR Principles. With thousands of options available, however, the lists of deposition repositories recommended by publishers are often different and consequently the guidance provided to authors may vary from journal to journal. This is due to a lack of common criteria used to select the data repositories, but also to the fact that there is still no consensus of what constitutes a good data repository. 

To tackle this, FAIRsharing and DataCite have joined forces with a group of publisher representatives (authors of this work) who are actively implementing data policies and recommending data repositories to researchers. The result of our work is a set of proposed criteria that journals and publishers believe are important for the identification and selection of data repositories, which can be recommended to researchers when they are preparing to publish the data underlying their findings. …”

Public Access to NIST Research | NIST

“NIST is committed to the idea that results of federally funded research are a valuable national resource and a strategic asset.  To the extent feasible and consistent with law, agency mission, resource constraints, and U.S. national, homeland, and economic security, NIST will promote the deposit of scientific data arising from unclassified research and programs, funded wholly or in part by NIST, except for Standard Reference Data, free of charge in publicly accessible databases.  Subject to the same conditions and constraints listed above, NIST also intends to make freely available to the public, in publicly accessible repositories, all peer-reviewed scholarly publications arising from unclassified research and programs funded wholly or in part by NIST. 

 

NIST publications can be located through the NIST website.  Peer-reviewed papers are deposited in PMC.  NIST Technical Series and publications that are not peer reviewed are available through govinfo.  Papers can also be located through science.gov along with other government papers.  NIST data can be located through the Science Data Portal on the NIST website and through data.gov, along with other government data.  Links to repositories containing NIST code, data, and publications are provided to the right.

 

NIST has established an embargo period of no more than 12 months post-publication for making peer-reviewed publications freely available through NIST’s repository on PMC.  Stakeholders may petition NIST’s Open Access Officer to change the embargo period in the following year for publications in a specified scientific field.  A petition must demonstrate that the existing embargo period for certain fields of scientific research does not provide a public benefit and is inconsistent with the objectives articulated in the OSTP Memo.  When considering changes to the embargo period, NIST will consult with other agencies that fund related areas of scientific research.”

Indonesia’s first scientific data bank is a step towards strengthening ‘open data’ practices

“In August 2019, the government launched the National Scientific Repository (RIN) to become a national-level repository that aggregates research data from various sources.

Born from the mandate of Indonesia’s new science law, the repository aims to make research data accessible for the academic community to verify scientific discoveries better and make it easier for other scientists to further contribute to the field.

Although challenges remain, the newly launched national repository is a great first step in strengthening open data practices and improving research quality in Indonesia….”

STRIDES Initiative | Data Science at NIH

“The NIH Science and Technology Research Infrastructure for Discovery, Experimentation, and Sustainability (STRIDES) Initiative allows NIH to explore the use of cloud environments to streamline NIH data use by partnering with commercial providers. NIH’s STRIDES Initiative provides cost-effective access to industry-leading partners to help advance biomedical research. These partnerships enable access to rich datasets and advanced computational infrastructure, tools, and services.

The STRIDES Initiative is one of many NIH-wide efforts to implement the NIH Strategic Plan for Data Science, which provides a roadmap for modernizing the NIH-funded biomedical data science ecosystem.

By leveraging the STRIDES Initiative, NIH and NIH-funded institutions can begin to create a robust, interconnected ecosystem that breaks down silos related to generating, analyzing, and sharing research data….”

Publishers’ Responsibilities in Promoting Data Quality and Reproducibility | SpringerLink

Abstract:  Scholarly publishers can help to increase data quality and reproducible research by promoting transparency and openness. Increasing transparency can be achieved by publishers in six key areas: (1) understanding researchers’ problems and motivations, by conducting and responding to the findings of surveys; (2) raising awareness of issues and encouraging behavioural and cultural change, by introducing consistent journal policies on sharing research data, code and materials; (3) improving the quality and objectivity of the peer-review process by implementing reporting guidelines and checklists and using technology to identify misconduct; (4) improving scholarly communication infrastructure with journals that publish all scientifically sound research, promoting study registration, partnering with data repositories and providing services that improve data sharing and data curation; (5) increasing incentives for practising open research with data journals and software journals and implementing data citation and badges for transparency; and (6) making research communication more open and accessible, with open-access publishing options, permitting text and data mining and sharing publisher data and metadata and through industry and community collaboration. This chapter describes practical approaches being taken by publishers, in these six areas, their progress and effectiveness and the implications for researchers publishing their work.

 

 

Building Trust to Break Down Barriers | The Official PLOS Blog

“At PLOS we have invested significantly in people and processes to support a strong journal data sharing policy since 2014. We are seeing a steady increase year-on-year in the proportion of PLOS authors who use a data repository. Although less costly for publishers, journal policies that only encourage data sharing have much lower levels of compliance….”