Embracing data preservation, sharing, and re-use in traumatic stress research

Abstract

This editorial argues that it is time for the traumatic stress field to join the growing international movement towards Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Re-usable (FAIR) research data, and that we are well-positioned to do so. The field has a huge, largely untapped resource in the enormous number of rich potentially re-usable datasets that are not currently shared or preserved. We have several promising shared data resources created via international collaborative efforts by traumatic stress researchers, but we do not yet have common standards for data description, sharing, or preservation. And, despite the promise of novel findings from data sharing and re-use, there are a number of barriers to researchers' adoption of FAIR data practices. We present a vision for the future of FAIR traumatic stress data, and a call to action for the traumatic stress research community and individual researchers and research teams to help achieve this vision.

Sexual assault as a public health problem and other developments in psychotraumatology

“…Data sharing – We have made a big step towards sharing of data (see also Kassam-Adams & Olff, 2020 ; Olff, 2020 ). FAIR Guiding Principles stating that data should be Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Re-usable (FAIR) does not always mean data need to be completely open but knowing where to find traumatic stress data sets is a big first step.…”

To share or not to share – 10 years of European Journal of Psychotraumatology

“…We could be much more efficient in collaborating on building and leveraging data sets. This is true not only for big datasets but there is a lot of potential in the many smaller psychotrauma research data sets (Ferguson, Nielson, Cragin, Bandrowski, & Martone, 2014 ; Kassam-Adams & Olff, 2020 ). Open data allow researchers from around the world to collaborate on important projects.…”

“…Our vision for FAIR traumatic stress data as described by Kassam-Adams and Olff ( 2020 ) is summarized in Figure 1 .

Figure 1.

…”

“…Yet, as Digital Science as well as the European Commission’s Facts and Figures for Open Research Data both show, authors’ attitudes reveal that they see the value in having access to others’ data, yet are less likely to share their own. As described by Kassam-Adams and Olff ( 2020 ) there are several perceived barriers. Are we afraid of ‘being scooped’, of others using our data in ways we would have liked to use them?…”

“…Furthermore, most journal policies do not require an author to share full set of raw data, but rather the sub-set of data that underpins the analysis presented in a publication. In Kassam-Adams and Olff ( 2020 ) we addressed potential barriers to data sharing and strategies to address them ( Figure 3 ). The strategies include capacity-building actions on the part of stakeholders to support researchers as well as actions that can shift research culture towards recognizing and rewarding open practices.…”