ArticlePhilosophy of science2015
What Counts as Scientific Data? A Relational Framework.
Article in Philosophy of science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Remission Therapy Inquiry-Based Research Model (RIRM): a conceptual framework for mechanistic hypothesis generation.Frontiers in systems biology · 2026Article
- Measurement under uncertainty: theory-measurement relations in early electrophysiological research.History and philosophy of the life sciences · 2025Article
- The Incremental Growth of Data Infrastructure in Ecology (1980-2020).Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Digital twins and the digital logics of biodiversity.Social studies of science · 2024Article
- Race and indigeneity in human microbiome science: microbiomisation and the historiality of otherness.History and philosophy of the life sciences · 2024Article
- Data as symptom: Doctors' responses to patient-provided data in general practice.Social studies of science · 2023Article
- Eater-oriented knowledge framework for reducing salt and dietary sodium intake (scoping review).Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Review
- Inference to the best action and its basis in clinical expertise.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Review
- A breach in the social contract: Limited participation and limited evidence in COVID-19 responses.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2022Article
- Metadata accounts: Achieving data and evidence in scientific research.Social studies of science · 2019Article
- Article
- Minimal barcode distance between two water mite species from Madeira Island: a cautionary tale.Experimental & applied acarology · 2017Article
- Between Scylla and Charybdis: reconciling competing data management demands in the life sciences.BMC medical ethics · 2016Article
- Co-created data governance frameworks for youth mental healthcare: Values, principles, and implementation-A scoping review.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
This paper proposes an account of scientific data that makes sense of recent debates on data-driven research, while also building on the history of data production and use particularly within biology. In this view, 'data' is a relational category applied to research outputs that are taken, at specific moments of inquiry, to provide evidence for knowledge claims of interest to the researchers involved. They do not have truth-value in and of themselves, nor can they be seen as straightforward representations of given phenomena. Rather, they are fungible objects defined by their portability and their prospective usefulness as evidence.
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.