ArticlePloS one2017
Research data management in academic institutions: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- Managing complexity in research data management for heterogeneous biotechnological data: a perspective on interacting as data steward.Bioprocess and biosystems engineering · 2026Review
- Simplifying Multimodal Clinical Research Data Management: Introducing an Integrated and User-friendly Database Concept.Applied clinical informatics · 2024Article
- FAIR and scalable management of small-angle X-ray scattering data.Journal of applied crystallography · 2023Article
- FAIR research data management as community approach in bioengineering.Engineering in life sciences · 2023Article
- Research data management needs assessment for social sciences graduate students: A mixed methods study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Data Mining, Quality and Management in the Life Sciences.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- Best practices in the real-world data life cycle.PLOS digital health · 2022Review
- Health sciences librarians' engagement in open science: a scoping review.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
- Improving target assessment in biomedical research: the GOT-IT recommendations.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2021Review
- Research data management in health and biomedical citizen science: practices and prospects.JAMIA open · 2020Article
- When are researchers willing to share their data? - Impacts of values and uncertainty on open data in academia.PloS one · 2020Article
- The views, perspectives, and experiences of academic researchers with data sharing and reuse: A meta-synthesis.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study is to describe the volume, topics, and methodological nature of the existing research literature on research data management in academic institutions. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a scoping review by searching forty literature databases encompassing a broad range of disciplines from inception to April 2016. We included all study types and data extracted on study design, discipline, data collection tools, and phase of the research data lifecycle.
resultsWe included 301 articles plus 10 companion reports after screening 13,002 titles and abstracts and 654 full-text articles. Most articles (85%) were published from 2010 onwards and conducted within the sciences (86%). More than three-quarters of the articles (78%) reported methods that included interviews, cross-sectional, or case studies. Most articles (68%) included the Giving Access to Data phase of the UK Data Archive Research Data Lifecycle that examines activities such as sharing data. When studies were grouped into five dominant groupings (Stakeholder, Data, Library, Tool/Device, and Publication), data quality emerged as an integral element.
conclusionMost studies relied on self-reports (interviews, surveys) or accounts from an observer (case studies) and we found few studies that collected empirical evidence on activities amongst data producers, particularly those examining the impact of research data management interventions. As well, fewer studies examined research data management at the early phases of research projects. The quality of all research outputs needs attention, from the application of best practices in research data management studies, to data producers depositing data in repositories for long-term use.
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.