ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2022
Aligning restricted access data with FAIR: a systematic review.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Crediting and citing Indigenous Knowledges within research.Bioscience · 2026Article
- Mathematical Oncology: How Modeling Is Transforming Clinical Decision-Making.Cancer research · 2025Review
- Making trauma ecological momentary assessment studies FAIR: review of design considerations and data procedures.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Review
- Guidance on minimum information requirements (MIR) from designing to reporting human biomonitoring (HBM).Environment international · 2025Article
- Perceptual and technical barriers in sharing and formatting metadata accompanying omics studies.Cell genomics · 2025Review
- Concordance with CONSORT-AI guidelines in reporting of randomised controlled trials investigating artificial intelligence in oncology: a systematic review.BMJ oncology · 2025Article
- Big data approaches to bovine bioacoustics: a FAIR-compliant dataset and scalable ML framework for precision livestock welfare.Frontiers in big data · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding the complexity of restricted research data is vitally important in the current new era of Open Science. While the FAIR Guiding Principles have been introduced to help researchers to make data Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable, it is still unclear how the notions of FAIR and Openness can be applied in the context of restricted data. Many methods have been proposed in support of the implementation of the principles, but there is yet no consensus among the scientific community as to the suitable mechanisms of making restricted data FAIR. We present here a systematic literature review to identify the methods applied by scientists when researching restricted data in a FAIR-compliant manner in the context of the FAIR principles. Through the employment of a descriptive and iterative study design, we aim to answer the following three questions: (1) What methods have been proposed to apply the FAIR principles to restricted data?, (2) How can the relevant aspects of the methods proposed be categorized?, (3) What is the maturity of the methods proposed in applying the FAIR principles to restricted data?. After analysis of the 40 included publications, we noticed that the methods found, reflect the stages of the Data Life Cycle, and can be divided into the following Classes: Data Collection, Metadata Representation, Data Processing, Anonymization, Data Publication, Data Usage and Post Data Usage. We observed that a large number of publications used 'Access Control' and 'Usage and License Terms' methods, while others such as 'Embargo on Data Release' and the use of 'Synthetic Data' were used in fewer instances. In conclusion, we are presenting the first extensive literature review on the methods applied to confidential data in the context of FAIR, providing a comprehensive conceptual framework for future research on restricted access data.
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.