ReviewNeuroinformatics2022
A Standards Organization for Open and FAIR Neuroscience: the International Neuroinformatics Coordinating Facility.
Review in Neuroinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Building a synthesis-ready research ecosystem: fostering collaboration and open science to accelerate biomedical translation.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Pooled it
- Reconciling global collaboration and data sovereignty in neuroscience.Nature neuroscience · 2026Review
- Crowdsourcing and machine learning contests in Parkinson's disease research - when do they work?Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2026Review
- eFEL: electrophysiology feature extraction library.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- A layered standards framework for integrating single-cell and spatial omics data into brain cell atlases.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Bridging the neuro-AI chasm: a framework for scalable, contextually adaptive training resources in large-scale brain data science.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Pennsieve: A Collaborative Platform for Translational Neuroscience and Beyond.Scientific data · 2025Article
- A guide to developing harmonized research workflows in a team science context.Experimental neurology · 2025Review
- Article
- Article
- Challenging the status quo: A guide to open and reproducible neuroimaging for early career researchers.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Reporting checklists in neuroimaging: promoting transparency, replicability, and reproducibility.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024Review
- Accelerating the continuous community sharing of digital neuromorphology data.FASEB bioAdvances · 2024Article
- Automating literature screening and curation with applications to computational neuroscience.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Open Data governance at the Canadian Open Neuroscience Platform (CONP): From the Walled Garden to the Arboretum.GigaScience · 2024Article
- Editorial: On the Economics of Neuroscientific Data Sharing.Neuroinformatics · 2024Article
- The Locare workflow: representing neuroscience data locations as geometric objects in 3D brain atlases.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2024Article
- Population Neuroscience: Strategies to Promote Data Sharing While Protecting Privacy.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2024Review
- Increasing Rigor of Preclinical Research to Maximize Opportunities for Translation.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2023Review
- Decoding Mental Effort in a Quasi-Realistic Scenario: A Feasibility Study on Multimodal Data Fusion and Classification.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is great need for coordination around standards and best practices in neuroscience to support efforts to make neuroscience a data-centric discipline. Major brain initiatives launched around the world are poised to generate huge stores of neuroscience data. At the same time, neuroscience, like many domains in biomedicine, is confronting the issues of transparency, rigor, and reproducibility. Widely used, validated standards and best practices are key to addressing the challenges in both big and small data science, as they are essential for integrating diverse data and for developing a robust, effective, and sustainable infrastructure to support open and reproducible neuroscience. However, developing community standards and gaining their adoption is difficult. The current landscape is characterized both by a lack of robust, validated standards and a plethora of overlapping, underdeveloped, untested and underutilized standards and best practices. The International Neuroinformatics Coordinating Facility (INCF), an independent organization dedicated to promoting data sharing through the coordination of infrastructure and standards, has recently implemented a formal procedure for evaluating and endorsing community standards and best practices in support of the FAIR principles. By formally serving as a standards organization dedicated to open and FAIR neuroscience, INCF helps evaluate, promulgate, and coordinate standards and best practices across neuroscience. Here, we provide an overview of the process and discuss how neuroscience can benefit from having a dedicated standards body.
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.