ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2021
Motivating data contributions via a distinct career currency.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A roadmap for equitable reuse of public microbiome data.Nature microbiology · 2025Review
- Data as scientific currency: Challenges experienced by researchers with sharing health data in sub-Saharan Africa.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Slow improvement to the archiving quality of open datasets shared by researchers in ecology and evolution.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
- The early bird gets the return: The benefits of publishing your data sooner.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
If collecting research data is perceived as poorly rewarded compared to data synthesis and analysis, this can slow overall research progress via two effects. People who have already collected data may be slow to make it openly accessible. Also, researchers may reallocate effort from collecting fresh data to synthesizing and analysing data already accessible. Here, we advocate for a second career currency in the form of data contributions statements embedded within applications for jobs, promotions and research grants. This workable step forward would provide for peer opinion to operate across thousands of selection and promotion committees and granting panels. In this way, fair valuation of data contributions relative to publications could emerge.
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.