Peer Review of Research Data Submissions to ScholarsArchive@OSU: How can we improve the curation of research datasets to enhance reusability?

Objective: Best practices such as the FAIR Principles (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, Reusability) were developed to ensure that published datasets are reusable. While we employ best practices in the curation of datasets, we want to learn how domain experts view the reusability of datasets in our institutional repository, ScholarsArchive@OSU. Curation workflows are designed by data curators based on their own recommendations, but research data is extremely specialized, and such workflows are rarely evaluated by researchers. In this project we used peer-review by domain experts to evaluate the reusability of the datasets in our institutional repository, with the goal of informing our curation methods and ensure that the limited resources of our library are maximizing the reusability of research data. Methods: We asked all researchers who have datasets submitted in Oregon State University’s repository to refer us to domain experts who could review the reusability of their data sets. Two data curators who are non-experts also reviewed the same datasets. We gave both groups review guidelines based on the guidelines of several journals. Eleven domain experts and two data curators reviewed eight datasets. The review included the quality of the repository record, the quality of the documentation, and the quality of the data. We then compared the comments given by the two groups. Correspondence: Clara Llebot: clara.llebot@oregonstate.edu

[1]  Elizabeth D. Dalton,et al.  Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide , 2015, PloS one.

[2]  E. Hildreth,et al.  Editorial policy , 1996, Vision Research.

[3]  J. Neigel,et al.  ENHANCING THE RETRDEVABILITY OF POPULATION GENETIC SURVEY DATA? AN ASSESSMENT OF ANIMAL MITOCHONDRIAL DNA STUDIES , 1999, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[4]  Christine L. Borgman,et al.  The conundrum of sharing research data , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[5]  Mark Gahegan,et al.  Biodiversity data should be published, cited, and peer reviewed. , 2013, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[6]  Jake Carlson,et al.  Data Management and Sharing from the Perspective of Graduate Students: An Examination of the Culture and Practice at the Water Quality Field Station , 2013 .

[7]  Sarah Callaghan,et al.  Citation and Peer Review of Data: Moving Towards Formal Data Publication , 2011, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[8]  Erik Schultes,et al.  The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship , 2016, Scientific Data.

[9]  Lisa R Johnston,et al.  Data Management Skills Needed by Structural Engineering Students: Case Study at the University of Minnesota , 2013 .

[10]  C. Strasser,et al.  Researcher Perspectives on Publication and Peer Review of Data , 2014, PloS one.

[11]  Oumar Gaye,et al.  Avoiding Data Dumpsters--Toward Equitable and Useful Data Sharing. , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  A. Vickers,et al.  Empirical Study of Data Sharing by Authors Publishing in PLoS Journals , 2009, PloS one.

[13]  Florence Debarre,et al.  The Availability of Research Data Declines Rapidly with Article Age , 2013, Current Biology.

[14]  Amanda L. Whitmire,et al.  Water, Water, Everywhere: Defining and Assessing Data Sharing in Academia , 2016, PloS one.

[15]  Linda Newman,et al.  Giving datasets context: a comparison study of institutional repositories that apply varying degrees of curation , 2018, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[16]  Michael Boock,et al.  Variability in academic research data management practices: Implications for data services development from a faculty survey , 2015, Program.

[17]  Steve Marks,et al.  The Changing Influence of Journal Data Sharing Policies on Local RDM Practices , 2017, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[18]  Steve Van Tuyl,et al.  Assessing Research Data Management Practices of Faculty at Carnegie Mellon University , 2015 .

[19]  GUIDE FOR REFEREES , 2001 .

[20]  Douglas J. Joubert,et al.  Biomedical Data Sharing and Reuse: Attitudes and Practices of Clinical and Scientific Research Staff , 2015, PloS one.

[21]  David Moher,et al.  Data sharing and reanalysis of randomized controlled trials in leading biomedical journals with a full data sharing policy: survey of studies published in The BMJ and PLOS Medicine , 2018, British Medical Journal.

[22]  Ute Roessner,et al.  Best practice data life cycle approaches for the life sciences , 2017, bioRxiv.

[23]  William H. Mischo,et al.  Data Management Practices and Perspectives of Atmospheric Scientists and Engineering Faculty. , 2016 .

[24]  J. Holdren Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Scientific Research , 2013 .

[25]  Susan Wells Parham,et al.  Institutional Readiness for Data Stewardship: Findings and Recommendations from the Research Data Assessment , 2013 .

[26]  J. Borghi,et al.  Data management and sharing in neuroimaging: Practices and perceptions of MRI researchers , 2018, bioRxiv.

[27]  Lisa R Johnston,et al.  Data Curation Network: How Do We Compare? A Snapshot of Six Academic Library Institutions’ Data Repository and Curation Services , 2017 .

[28]  Katherine G. Akers,et al.  Disciplinary differences in faculty research data management practices and perspectives , 2013, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[29]  Ethan P. White,et al.  Nine simple ways to make it easier to (re)use your data , 2013 .