Data citation needed | Scientific Data

“Starting last month, publications at Scientific Data now include data citations in the main reference list, rather than in a separate data citations section. This change will be supported by changes to the underlying structure of our content to promote machine readability and reuse of links between scholarly articles and datasets. This aligns the journal with a roadmap for data citation co-developed by representatives of the academic community and several publishers, which seeks to make data citation a standard part of the scholarly publishing process….”

Open science: European universities have more homework to do on data handling | Science|Business

“According to the latest data from the European University Association (EUA), only 21 per cent of surveyed higher education institutions have policies on research data management in place. Another 38 per cent of universities were in the process of developing them. However, almost 40 per cent reported that they lacked or were not in the process of developing such policies.”

Assessment of Postdonation Outcomes in US Living Kidney Donors Using Publicly Available Data Sets. | Hypertension | JAMA Network Open | JAMA Network

Abstract:  Importance  There are limited resources providing postdonation conditions that can occur in living donors (LDs) of solid-organ transplant. Consequently, it is difficult to visualize and understand possible postdonation outcomes in LDs.

Objective  To assemble an open access resource that is representative of the demographic characteristics in the US national registry, maintained by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and administered by the United Network for Organ Sharing, but contains more follow-up information to help to examine postdonation outcomes in LDs.

Design, Setting, and Participants  Cohort study in which the data for the resource and analyses stemmed from the transplant data set derived from 27 clinical studies from the ImmPort database, which is an open access repository for clinical studies. The studies included data collected from 1963 to 2016. Data from the United Network for Organ Sharing Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network national registry collected from October 1987 to March 2016 were used to determine representativeness. Data analysis took place from June 2016 to May 2018. Data from 20 ImmPort clinical studies (including clinical trials and observational studies) were curated, and a cohort of 11?263 LDs was studied, excluding deceased donors, LDs with 95% or more missing data, and studies without a complete data dictionary. The harmonization process involved the extraction of common features from each clinical study based on categories that included demographic characteristics as well as predonation and postdonation data.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Thirty-six postdonation events were identified, represented, and analyzed via a trajectory network analysis.

Results  The curated data contained 10?869 living kidney donors (median [interquartile range] age, 39 [31-48] years; 6175 [56.8%] women; and 9133 [86.6%] of European descent). A total of 9558 living kidney donors with postdonation data were analyzed. Overall, 1406 LDs (14.7%) had postdonation events. The 4 most common events were hypertension (806 [8.4%]), diabetes (190 [2.0%]), proteinuria (171 [1.8%]), and postoperative ileus (147 [1.5%]). Relatively few events (n?=?269) occurred before the 2-year postdonation mark. Of the 1746 events that took place 2 years or more after donation, 1575 (90.2%) were nonsurgical; nonsurgical conditions tended to occur in the wide range of 2 to 40 years after donation (odds ratio, 38.3; 95% CI, 4.12-1956.9).

Conclusions and Relevance  Most events that occurred more than 2 years after donation were nonsurgical and could occur up to 40 years after donation. Findings support the construction of a national registry for long-term monitoring of LDs and confirm the value of secondary reanalysis of clinical studies.

ZooArchNet: Connecting zooarchaeological specimens to the biodiversity and archaeology data networks

Abstract:  Interdisciplinary collaborations and data sharing are essential to addressing the long history of human-environmental interactions underlying the modern biodiversity crisis. Such collaborations are increasingly facilitated by, and dependent upon, sharing open access data from a variety of disciplinary communities and data sources, including those within biology, paleontology, and archaeology. Significant advances in biodiversity open data sharing have focused on neontological and paleontological specimen records, making available over a billion records through the Global Biodiversity Information Facility. But to date, less effort has been placed on the integration of important archaeological sources of biodiversity, such as zooarchaeological specimens. Zooarchaeological specimens are rich with both biological and cultural heritage data documenting nearly all phases of human interaction with animals and the surrounding environment through time, filling a critical gap between paleontological and neontological sources of data within biodiversity networks. Here we describe technical advances for mobilizing zooarchaeological specimen-specific biological and cultural data. In particular, we demonstrate adaptations in the workflow used by biodiversity publisher VertNet to mobilize Darwin Core formatted zooarchaeological data to the GBIF network. We also show how a linked open data approach can be used to connect existing biodiversity publishing mechanisms with archaeoinformatics publishing mechanisms through collaboration with the Open Context platform. Examples of ZooArchNet published datasets are used to show the efficacy of creating this critically needed bridge between biological and archaeological sources of open access data. These technical advances and efforts to support data publication are placed in the larger context of ZooarchNet, a new project meant to build community around new approaches to interconnect zoorchaeological data and knowledge across disciplines.

Research policy monitoring in the era of Open Science and Big Data – The what (indicators) and the how (infrastructures) | Thematic workshops

A two day workshop exploring mechanisms for research policy monitoring and indicators: discussing the what ‘indicators’ and the how: infrastructure. This workshop is in collaboration with Data4Impact, with support of Science Europe….”

University Journals – innovative academic publishing

The University Journals offers an alternative to the current journal ecosystem, Linked to university repositories, University Journals publish reviewed articles, data and other academic works on an accredited open access platform.

The University Journals platform is owned by the university community and offers Open Access journal publications to researchers affiliated to its university partners.

University Journals is a joint initiative from 14 international European universities. Initial development is funded by the PICA foundation and the University of Amsterdam.

OpenPlanetary Townhall on Open Science

“The paradigm of Open Science is based on the tiers Open Access, Open Data and Free Open Source Software (FOSS). However, the interconnections between the tiers remain to be improved. This is a critical factor to enable Open Science. This Townhall meeting reaches out all across EGU, espescially welcoming Early Career Scientists, to network and discuss the current challenges and opportunities…”

ICPSR [Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research]

An international consortium of more than 750 academic institutions and research organizations, Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) provides leadership and training in data access, curation, and methods of analysis for the social science research community.

ICPSR maintains a data archive of more than 250,000 files of research in the social and behavioral sciences. It hosts 21 specialized collections of data in education, aging, criminal justice, substance abuse, terrorism, and other fields.

ICPSR collaborates with a number of funders, including U.S. statistical agencies and foundations, to create thematic data collections and data stewardship and research projects….”

Government Data as Intellectual Property: Is Public Domain the Same as Open Access?

Key points to highlight: U.S. federal government data is released into the public domain. This raises concerns about:

  • privacy and security of data about individuals
  • the potential for enclosure if the U.S. government does not maintain human readable interfaces, i.e. if the open data is used by commercial companies to create toll access services and the government does not provide free end user services, this would be an instance of open commercial use effectively creating enclosure (or privatizing what is currently free government services)


Public domain and open data policies and how they are made. Current status of open data policies in the Federal government are changing with new laws. What is HR4174/S4047 and what does it say and mean? What are trends in government data policies regarding access to that statistical data? This article will give the reader an understanding of federal policies and laws regarding data.