Suppr超能文献

可重复和可再利用的研究:期刊数据共享政策达标了吗?

Reproducible and reusable research: are journal data sharing policies meeting the mark?

作者信息

Vasilevsky Nicole A, Minnier Jessica, Haendel Melissa A, Champieux Robin E

机构信息

OHSU Library, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.

Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.

出版信息

PeerJ. 2017 Apr 25;5:e3208. doi: 10.7717/peerj.3208. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is wide agreement in the biomedical research community that research data sharing is a primary ingredient for ensuring that science is more transparent and reproducible. Publishers could play an important role in facilitating and enforcing data sharing; however, many journals have not yet implemented data sharing policies and the requirements vary widely across journals. This study set out to analyze the pervasiveness and quality of data sharing policies in the biomedical literature.

METHODS

The online author's instructions and editorial policies for 318 biomedical journals were manually reviewed to analyze the journal's data sharing requirements and characteristics. The data sharing policies were ranked using a rubric to determine if data sharing was required, recommended, required only for omics data, or not addressed at all. The data sharing method and licensing recommendations were examined, as well any mention of reproducibility or similar concepts. The data was analyzed for patterns relating to publishing volume, Journal Impact Factor, and the publishing model (open access or subscription) of each journal.

RESULTS

A total of 11.9% of journals analyzed explicitly stated that data sharing was required as a condition of publication. A total of 9.1% of journals required data sharing, but did not state that it would affect publication decisions. 23.3% of journals had a statement encouraging authors to share their data but did not require it. A total of 9.1% of journals mentioned data sharing indirectly, and only 14.8% addressed protein, proteomic, and/or genomic data sharing. There was no mention of data sharing in 31.8% of journals. Impact factors were significantly higher for journals with the strongest data sharing policies compared to all other data sharing criteria. Open access journals were not more likely to require data sharing than subscription journals.

DISCUSSION

Our study confirmed earlier investigations which observed that only a minority of biomedical journals require data sharing, and a significant association between higher Impact Factors and journals with a data sharing requirement. Moreover, while 65.7% of the journals in our study that required data sharing addressed the concept of reproducibility, as with earlier investigations, we found that most data sharing policies did not provide specific guidance on the practices that ensure data is maximally available and reusable.

摘要

背景

生物医学研究界广泛认为,研究数据共享是确保科学更加透明和可重复的主要因素。出版商在促进和强制数据共享方面可以发挥重要作用;然而,许多期刊尚未实施数据共享政策,而且各期刊的要求差异很大。本研究旨在分析生物医学文献中数据共享政策的普及程度和质量。

方法

人工查阅了318种生物医学期刊的在线作者指南和编辑政策,以分析期刊的数据共享要求和特点。使用一个评分标准对数据共享政策进行排名,以确定是否要求、推荐数据共享,是否仅要求组学数据共享,或根本未提及。研究了数据共享方法和许可建议,以及是否提及可重复性或类似概念。分析了数据与每种期刊的出版量、期刊影响因子和出版模式(开放获取或订阅)之间的关系模式。

结果

在分析的期刊中,共有11.9%明确表示要求数据共享作为发表的条件。共有9.1%的期刊要求数据共享,但未表明这会影响发表决定。23.3%的期刊发表声明鼓励作者共享数据,但不要求这样做。共有9.1%的期刊间接提及数据共享,只有14.8%涉及蛋白质、蛋白质组和/或基因组数据共享。31.8%的期刊未提及数据共享。与所有其他数据共享标准相比具有最强数据共享政策的期刊,其影响因子显著更高。开放获取期刊并不比订阅期刊更有可能要求数据共享。

讨论

我们的研究证实了早期的调查结果,即只有少数生物医学期刊要求数据共享,以及较高的影响因子与有数据共享要求的期刊之间存在显著关联。此外,虽然我们研究中要求数据共享的期刊中有65.7%涉及可重复性概念,但与早期调查一样,我们发现大多数数据共享政策并未就确保数据最大程度可用和可重复使用的实践提供具体指导。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d875/5407277/aa0885a28d38/peerj-05-3208-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验