ArticleHistory and philosophy of the life sciences2021
Open science, data sharing and solidarity: who benefits?
Article in History and philosophy of the life sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Cloud-Aware Scalable Architecture for Distributed Edge-Enabled BCI Biosensor System.Biosensors · 2026Article
- Review
- Health data sovereignty: pinpointing conceptual ambiguities.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Messing with Merton: The intersection between open science practices and Mertonian values.Accountability in research · 2024Article
- Harnessing open science practices to teach ecology and evolutionary biology using interactive tutorials.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Article
- A pathway to strengthening open science: comments on the draftFrontiers in pharmacology · 2024Review
- Cross-border data sharing through the lens of research ethics committee members in sub-Saharan Africa.PloS one · 2024Article
- From policy to practice: Lessons learned from an open science funding initiative.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Drivers and constraints to environmental sustainability in UK-based biobanking: balancing resource efficiency and future value.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Must-have Qualities of Clinical Research on Artificial Intelligence and Machine LearningBalkan medical journal · 2023Review
- Challenges and recommendations for wearable devices in digital health: Data quality, interoperability, health equity, fairness.PLOS digital health · 2022Review
- New Meanings in the Archive: Privacy, Technological Change and the Status of Sources.Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte · 2022Article
- Identifying and addressing data asymmetries so as to enable (better) science.Frontiers in big data · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research, innovation, and progress in the life sciences are increasingly contingent on access to large quantities of data. This is one of the key premises behind the "open science" movement and the global calls for fostering the sharing of personal data, datasets, and research results. This paper reports on the outcomes of discussions by the panel "Open science, data sharing and solidarity: who benefits?" held at the 2021 Biennial conference of the International Society for the History, Philosophy, and Social Studies of Biology (ISHPSSB), and hosted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL).
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.