Improving Opportunities for New Value of Open Data: Assessing and Certifying Research Data Repositories

Abstract

Investments in research that produce scientific and scholarly data can be leveraged by enabling the resulting research data products and services to be used by broader communities and for new purposes, extending reuse beyond the initial users and purposes for which the data were originally collected. Submitting research data to a data repository offers opportunities for the data to be used in the future, providing ways for new benefits to be realized from data reuse. Improvements to data repositories that facilitate new uses of data increase the potential for data reuse and for gains in the value of open data products and services that are associated with such reuse. Assessing and certifying the capabilities and services offered by data repositories provides opportunities for improving the repositories and for realizing the value to be attained from new uses of data. The evolution of data repository certification instruments is described and discussed in terms of the implications for the curation and continuing use of research data.

Changing patterns in reporting and sharing of review data in systematic reviews with meta-analysis of the effects of interventions: a meta-research study

“…Data sharing via supplementary files or public repositories is an effective tool to improve reproducibility of systematic reviews and should be made a standard practice. Concerted efforts around data infrastructures, fair use guidelines and a supportive environment are required to make data sharing a standard practice [48][49][50].…”

Changing patterns in reporting and sharing of review data in systematic reviews with meta-analysis of the effects of interventions: cross sectional meta-research study

“…Concerted efforts around data infrastructure, fair use guidelines, and a supportive environment are required to make data sharing a standard practice. 48 49 50 …”

“…Concerted efforts around data infrastructure, fair use guidelines, and a supportive environment are required to make data sharing a standard practice. [48][49][50] conclusion Incomplete reporting of several recommended items in systematic reviews persists, even in reviews that claim to have followed a reporting guideline. Data sharing policies could be an effective strategy to promote sharing of systematic review data and materials.…”

Towards a Taxonomy of Trustworthy Digital Repository Impacts

“…We represent the impact of a digital repository's activities as a predicate relationship connecting a repository and activity with an effect on a community. Our impacts are based on concepts found in the literature about measuring impacts and outcomes for digital repositories (Big Data Interagency Working Group, 2018b; Downs, 2021). Our definition of an “impact” is any individual, named or anonymous, that stands in a “satisfies_goal” relationship to some goal.…”

“…These communities include a variety of researchers, educators and students, planners and policy‐makers, representatives of commercial and non‐profit entities, and members of the general public who use data, produce data, or are the subjects of data. Data repositories that enable the use of data by diverse audiences and their designated communities “improve the potential usefulness of data” and “increase opportunities for contributing to both the scientific value and the societal value of data” (Downs, 2021, p. 3). Measuring the societal impact of TDRs is difficult because their certification is not based on the assessment of controllable variables by which to compare outcomes (Kuwuyama, 2017; Maemura et al, 2017).…”