Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28658288›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

A conceptual framework for quality assessment and management of biodiversity data.

Allan Koch Veiga, Antonio Mauro Saraiva, Arthur David Chapman, Paul John Morris, Christian Gendreau, Dmitry Schigel, Tim James Robertson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Improved standardization of transcribed digital specimen data.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2019
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Allan Koch VeigaUniversity of São Paulo, Research Center on Biodiversity and Computing, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2672-8115
Antonio Mauro SaraivaUniversity of São Paulo, Research Center on Biodiversity and Computing, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Arthur David ChapmanAustralian Biodiversity Information Services, Ballan, Victoria, Australia.
Paul John MorrisHarvard University, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Christian GendreauUniversité de Montréal, Institut de Recherche en Biologie Végétale, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Dmitry SchigelGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility, Secretariat, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Tim James RobertsonGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility, Secretariat, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increasing availability of digitized biodiversity data worldwide, provided by an increasing number of institutions and researchers, and the growing use of those data for a variety of purposes have raised concerns related to the "fitness for use" of such data and the impact of data quality (DQ) on the outcomes of analyses, reports, and decisions. A consistent approach to assess and manage data quality is currently critical for biodiversity data users. However, achieving this goal has been particularly challenging because of idiosyncrasies inherent in the concept of quality. DQ assessment and management cannot be performed if we have not clearly established the quality needs from a data user's standpoint. This paper defines a formal conceptual framework to support the biodiversity informatics community allowing for the description of the meaning of "fitness for use" from a data user's perspective in a common and standardized manner. This proposed framework defines nine concepts organized into three classes: DQ Needs, DQ Solutions and DQ Report. The framework is intended to formalize human thinking into well-defined components to make it possible to share and reuse concepts of DQ needs, solutions and reports in a common way among user communities. With this framework, we establish a common ground for the collaborative development of solutions for DQ assessment and management based on data fitness for use principles. To validate the framework, we present a proof of concept based on a case study at the Museum of Comparative Zoology of Harvard University. In future work, we will use the framework to engage the biodiversity informatics community to formalize and share DQ profiles related to DQ needs across the community.

Indexed as

BiodiversityComputational Biology

Identifiers

PMID28658288
PMCPMC5489162

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.