References

Inglese

Seek and you may (not) find: A multi-institutional analysis of where research data are shared

Pubblicato in PLOS ONE
Autori Lisa R. Johnston, Alicia Hofelich Mohr, Joel Herndon, Shawna Taylor, Jake R. Carlson, Lizhao Ge, Jennifer Moore, Jonathan Petters, Wendy Kozlowski, Cynthia Hudson Vitale

Research data sharing has become an expected component of scientific research and scholarly publishing practice over the last few decades, due in part to requirements for federally funded research. As part of a larger effort to better understand the workflows and costs of public access to research data, this project conducted a high-level analysis of where academic research data is most frequently shared. To do this, we leveraged the DataCite and Crossref application programming interfaces (APIs) in search of Publisher field elements demonstrating which data repositories were utilized by researchers from six academic research institutions between 2012–2022. In addition, we also ran a preliminary analysis of the quality of the metadata associated with these published datasets, comparing the extent to which information was missing from metadata fields deemed important for public access to research data. Results show that the top 10 publishers accounted for 89.0% to 99.8% of the datasets connected with the institutions in our study. Known data repositories, including institutional data repositories hosted by those institutions, were initially lacking from our sample due to varying metadata standards and practices. We conclude that the metadata quality landscape for published research datasets is uneven; key information, such as author affiliation, is often incomplete or missing from source data repositories and aggregators. To enhance the findability, interoperability, accessibility, and reusability (FAIRness) of research data, we provide a set of concrete recommendations that repositories and data authors can take to improve scholarly metadata associated with shared datasets.

Tedesco

Wie FAIR sind unsere Metadaten?

Pubblicato
Autori Marleen Burger, Anette Cordts, Ted Habermann

Im vorliegenden Erfahrungsbericht stellen wir eine Metadatenanalyse vor, welche die Metadatenqualität von 144 Repositorien des TIB-DOI-Service im Hinblick auf die Erfüllung der FAIR Data Principles, Konsistenz und Vollständigkeit untersucht. Im Ergebnis zeigt sich, dass der Fokus der untersuchten Repositorien schwerpunktmäßig auf der Auffindbarkeit der mit Metadaten beschriebenen Ressourcen liegt und im Gesamtdurchschnitt über die Metadaten-Pflichtfelder hinaus nur wenige weitere Metadaten angegeben werden. Insbesondere mit Blick auf eine angestrebte bessere Nachnutzbarkeit sowie eine stärkere Verknüpfung mit anderen in Beziehung stehenden persistenten Identifikatoren wie ORCID, ROR ID oder DOI-zu-DOI-Beziehungen mit zitierten oder zitierenden Ressourcen, bestehen noch ungenutzte Potenziale, die im Sinne einer offenen, zukunftsweisenden Wissenschaft erschlossen werden sollten. Dahingegen zeigt unsere Analyse auch einzelne Repositorien mit umfangreichen Metadaten als Best-Practice-Beispiele auf, an denen sich andere Repositorien orientieren können. Insgesamt ermöglicht die durchgeführte Metadatenanalyse die Ableitung von Handlungsempfehlungen zur passgenauen Beratung von Repositorien, die ihre Metadatenqualität verbessern möchten.

Earth and related environmental sciences

Making the Invisible Visible: Celebrating the Year of Open Science

Pubblicato

Metadata Game Changers and the INFORMATE Project had the opportunity to present some of our recent work during the recent culminating conference to showcase the outcomes, coalition-building efforts, and ongoing work stemming from the 2023 Year of Open Science (YOS). Some highlights are described here and a recording of the talk is also available.