ArticleGigaScience2019
DAISY: A Data Information System for accountability under the General Data Protection Regulation.
Article in GigaScience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- DS-PACK: Tool assembly for the end-to-end support of controlled access human data sharing.Scientific data · 2024Article
- The Translational Data Catalog - discoverable biomedical datasets.Scientific data · 2023Article
- DAISY: A Data Information System for accountability under the General Data Protection Regulation.GigaScience · 2019Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe new European legislation on data protection, namely, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), has introduced comprehensive requirements for the documentation about the processing of personal data as well as informing the data subjects of its use. GDPR's accountability principle requires institutions, projects, and data hubs to document their data processings and demonstrate compliance with the GDPR. In response to this requirement, we see the emergence of commercial data-mapping tools, and institutions creating GDPR data register with such tools. One shortcoming of this approach is the genericity of tools, and their process-based model not capturing the project-based, collaborative nature of data processing in biomedical research.
findingsWe have developed a software tool to allow research institutions to comply with the GDPR accountability requirement and map the sometimes very complex data flows in biomedical research. By analysing the transparency and record-keeping obligations of each GDPR principle, we observe that our tool effectively meets the accountability requirement.
conclusionsThe GDPR is bringing data protection to center stage in research data management, necessitating dedicated tools, personnel, and processes. Our tool, DAISY, is tailored specifically for biomedical research and can help institutions in tackling the documentation challenge brought about by the GDPR. DAISY is made available as a free and open source tool on Github. DAISY is actively being used at the Luxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine and the ELIXIR-Luxembourg data hub.
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.