ArticlePLoS computational biology2022
Ten simple rules for funding scientific open source software.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Open practices across science, software, education and other domains.Nature human behaviour · 2026Review
- U-Plant and U-Plant DISCOVER: an open-source database for botanic garden collections management and public engagement.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2026Article
- Digital Data Donation With Adolescents.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Article
- Awareness of FAIR and FAIR4RS among international research software funders.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Evolving funding strategies for research software: Insights from an international survey of research funders.PloS one · 2025Article
- FAIR-USE4OS: Guidelines for creating impactful open-source software.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Strategic priorities and challenges in research software funding: Results from an international survey.F1000Research · 2024Article
- "Be sustainable": EOSC-Life recommendations for implementation of FAIR principles in life science data handling.The EMBO journal · 2023Article
- Article
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
Scientific research increasingly relies on open source software (OSS). Funding OSS development requires intentional focus on issues of scholarly credit, unique forms of labor, maintenance, governance, and inclusive community-building. Such issues cut across different scientific disciplines that make them of interest to a variety of funders and institutions but may present challenges in understanding generalized needs. Here we present 10 simple rules for investing in scientific OSS and the teams who build and maintain it.
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.