ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2022
A survey of the state of the practice for research software in the United States.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2022. 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.
- CODE beyond FAIR: a roadmap for reusable research software.Scientific data · 2026Article
- A system-wide snapshot: A multi-campus survey of open source contributors at the University of California.PloS one · 2026Article
- A case study in statistical software development for advanced evidence synthesis: the combined value of analysts and research software engineers.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Cycling on the Freeway: The perilous state of open-source neuroscience software.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Evolving funding strategies for research software: Insights from an international survey of research funders.PloS one · 2025Article
- A Perspective on Neuroscience Data Standardization with Neurodata Without Borders.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
- Article
- Strategic priorities and challenges in research software funding: Results from an international survey.F1000Research · 2024Article
- Open Science Drone Toolkit: Open source hardware and software for aerial data capture.PloS one · 2023Article
- A survey of the state of the practice for research software in the United States.PeerJ. Computer science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research software is a critical component of contemporary scholarship. Yet, most research software is developed and managed in ways that are at odds with its long-term sustainability. This paper presents findings from a survey of 1,149 researchers, primarily from the United States, about sustainability challenges they face in developing and using research software. Some of our key findings include a repeated need for more opportunities and time for developers of research software to receive training. These training needs cross the software lifecycle and various types of tools. We also identified the recurring need for better models of funding research software and for providing credit to those who develop the software so they can advance in their careers. The results of this survey will help inform future infrastructure and service support for software developers and users, as well as national research policy aimed at increasing the sustainability of research software.
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.