ArticleScientific data2018
Simplifying research access to genomics and health data with Library Cards.
Article in Scientific data, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterizing core outcomes of responsible stewardship for human genomic data in the cloud.BMC medical genomics · 2026Article
- Toward ethical provenance tracking: The GA4GH model data access agreement (DAA).Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2026Article
- Large-scale genotype prediction from RNA sequence data necessitates a new ethical and policy framework.Nature genetics · 2024Article
- Cloud-based biomedical data storage and analysis for genomic research: Landscape analysis of data governance in emerging NIH-supported platforms.HGG advances · 2023Review
- Consent Codes: Maintaining Consent in an Ever-expanding Open Science Ecosystem.Neuroinformatics · 2023Article
- Leveraging Algorithms to Improve Decision-Making Workflows for Genomic Data Access and Management.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2022Article
- Empirical validation of an automated approach to data use oversight.Cell genomics · 2021Article
- Cloud bursting galaxy: federated identity and access management.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- Registered access: authorizing data access.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2018Article
- Common ELIXIR Service for Researcher Authentication and Authorisation.F1000Research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The volume of genomics and health data is growing rapidly, driven by sequencing for both research and clinical use. However, under current practices, the data is fragmented into many distinct datasets, and researchers must go through a separate application process for each dataset. This is time-consuming both for the researchers and the data stewards, and it reduces the velocity of research and new discoveries that could improve human health. We propose to simplify this process, by introducing a standard Library Card that identifies and authenticates researchers across all participating datasets. Each researcher would only need to apply once to establish their bona fides as a qualified researcher, and could then use the Library Card to access a wide range of datasets that use a compatible data access policy and authentication protocol.
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.