ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2013
Making data sharing count: a publication-based solution.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed.
- Studying military and Veteran health using a life-course approach: Lessons learned from a Canadian record linkage study.Journal of military, veteran and family health · 2024Article
- How are exclusively data journals indexed in major scholarly databases? An examination of four databases.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Improving practices and inferences in developmental cognitive neuroscience.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2020Review
- EMG-Centered Multisensory Based Technologies for Pattern Recognition in Rehabilitation: State of the Art and Challenges.Biosensors · 2020Review
- Towards reproducible computational drug discovery.Journal of cheminformatics · 2020Review
- Data sharing, management, use, and reuse: Practices and perceptions of scientists worldwide.PloS one · 2020Article
- From data sharing to data publishing [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations].MNI open research · 2019Article
- Assessment of the impact of shared brain imaging data on the scientific literature.Nature communications · 2018Article
- National Neuroinformatics Framework for Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging (CCNA).Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2018Article
- Enhancing studies of the connectome in autism using the autism brain imaging data exchange II.Scientific data · 2017Article
- OpenfMRI: Open sharing of task fMRI data.NeuroImage · 2017Article
- Reproducibility in Computational Neuroscience Models and Simulations.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2016Article
- How open science helps researchers succeed.eLife · 2016Article
- A Practical Guide for Improving Transparency and Reproducibility in Neuroimaging Research.PLoS biology · 2016Article
- The brain imaging data structure, a format for organizing and describing outputs of neuroimaging experiments.Scientific data · 2016Article
- The Philadelphia Neurodevelopmental Cohort: A publicly available resource for the study of normal and abnormal brain development in youth.NeuroImage · 2016Article
- Data Publications Correlate with Citation Impact.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2016Article
- Sharing Neuron Data: Carrots, Sticks, and Digital Records.PLoS biology · 2015Article
- Genetic data sharing and privacy.Neuroinformatics · 2015Article
- Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The neuroimaging community has been increasingly called up to openly share data. Although data sharing has been a cornerstone of large-scale data consortia, the incentive for the individual researcher remains unclear. Other fields have benefited from embracing a data publication form - the data paper - that allows researchers to publish their datasets as a citable scientific publication. Such publishing mechanisms both give credit that is recognizable within the scientific ecosystem, and also ensure the quality of the published data and metadata through the peer review process. We discuss the specific challenges of adapting data papers to the needs of the neuroimaging community, and we propose guidelines for the structure as well as review process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.