ArticleThe journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association2021
Challenges with organization, discoverability and access in Canadian open health data repositories.
Article in The journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Open health data provides healthcare professionals, biomedical researchers and the general public with access to health data which has the potential to improve healthcare delivery and policy. The challenge is to create and implement appropriate metadata, or structured data about the data, to ensure that data are easy to discover, access and re-use. The goal of this study is to identify, evaluate and compare Canadian open health data repositories for their searching, browsing and navigation functionalities, the richness of their metadata description practices, and their metadata-based filtering mechanisms. Methods: Metadata-based search and browsing was evaluated in addition to the number and nature of metadata elements. Six Canadian open health data repositories across national, provincial and institutional levels were evaluated. Data collected using verbatim text recording was evaluated using an analytical framework based on the 2019 Dataverse North Metadata Best Practices guide and 2019 Data Citation Implementation Project roadmap. Results: All repositories required filtering to access "open health data." All repositories included 'subject' facets for filtering, and 'title' and 'description' on the Results List. Use case evaluations suggest improvements including advanced search, health-specific search terms, records for all repositories, and links to related publications. Discussion: Consistent use of 'title' and 'description' suggests that an interoperable interface is possible. Inconsistencies in records indicate the need for explicit, easy to find mechanisms to access metadata in repositories. The analytical framework represents first draft guidelines for metadata creation and implementation to improve organization, discoverability, and access to Canadian open health data.
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.