Quantifying the use of bioresources for promoting their sharing in scientific research

An increasing portion of biomedical research relies on the use of biobanks and databases. Sharing of such resources is essential for optimizing knowledge production. A major obstacle for sharing bioresources is the lack of recognition for the efforts involved in establishing, maintaining and sharing them, due to, in particular, the absence of adequate tools. Increasing demands on biobanks and databases to improve access should be complemented with efforts of end-users to recognize and acknowledge these resources. An appropriate set of tools must be developed and implemented to measure this impact.To address this issue we propose to measure the use in research of such bioresources as a value of their impact, leading to create an indicator: Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF). Key elements to be assessed are: defining obstacles to sharing samples and data, choosing adequate identifier for bioresources, identifying and weighing parameters to be considered in the metrics, analyzing the role of journal guidelines and policies for resource citing and referencing, assessing policies for resource access and sharing and their influence on bioresource use. This work allows us to propose a framework and foundations for the operational development of BRIF that still requires input from stakeholders within the biomedical community.

[1]  Mark Walport,et al.  Sharing research data to improve public health , 2011, The Lancet.

[2]  N. Hawkins,et al.  Data sharing in genomics — re-shaping scientific practice , 2009, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[3]  Anne Cambon-Thomsen,et al.  Assessing the impact of biobanks , 2003, Nature Genetics.

[4]  Sharyl J. Nass,et al.  Opening Up to Precompetitive Collaboration , 2010, Science Translational Medicine.

[5]  Anne Cambon-Thomsen,et al.  Tracing biological collections: between books and clinical trials. , 2008, JAMA.

[6]  Anne Cambon-Thomsen,et al.  The social and ethical issues of post-genomic human biobanks , 2004, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[7]  黄亚明(整理),et al.  ICMJE , 2012 .

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

[9]  Lucía Hilario Pérez,et al.  Author Details , 2020, Brexit and Tourism.

[10]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Public Availability of Published Research Data in High-Impact Journals , 2011, PloS one.

[11]  Martin Fenner,et al.  ORCID: Unique Identifiers for Authors and Contributors , 2011 .

[12]  J. Kaye [Selected Legislation and Jurisprudence OECD Guidelines on Human Biobanks and Genetic Research Databases, Selected Legislation and Jurisprudence Building a Foundation for Biobanking: The 2009 OECD Guidelines on Human Biobanks and Genetic Research Databases (HBGRDs)] , 2010 .

[13]  Ying-Yan Yu,et al.  Significance of biological resource collection and tumor tissue bank creation. , 2010, World journal of gastrointestinal oncology.

[14]  Anne Cambon-Thomsen,et al.  The role of a bioresource research impact factor as an incentive to share human bioresources , 2011, Nature Genetics.

[15]  B. Knoppers,et al.  Genomic databases access agreements: legal validity and possible sanctions , 2011, Human Genetics.

[16]  Joe Celko,et al.  Mathematical Biology , 2004 .

[17]  Norman Paskin E‐citations: actionable identifiers and scholarly referencing , 2000, Learn. Publ..

[18]  E. Garfield The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. , 2006, JAMA.

[19]  Elizabeth M. Smigielski,et al.  dbSNP: the NCBI database of genetic variation , 2001, Nucleic Acids Res..

[20]  Jane Kaye,et al.  From single biobanks to international networks: developing e-governance , 2011, Human Genetics.

[21]  Jane Kaye,et al.  Towards a data sharing Code of Conduct for international genomic research , 2011, Genome Medicine.

[22]  Gudmundur A Thorisson Accreditation and attribution in data sharing , 2009, Nature Biotechnology.