ArticleF1000Research2022
Implementation and assessment of an end-to-end Open Science & Data Collaborations program.
Article in F1000Research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The academic impact of Open Science: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2025Review
- Comparative Effectiveness of DHIS2 and FAIR Data Approaches for Privacy-Preserving Health Data Analytics in Uganda: A Systematic Review.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2025Review
- A libraries reproducibility hackathon: connecting students to university research and testing the longevity of published code.F1000Research · 2024Article
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
As research becomes more interdisciplinary, fast-paced, data-intensive, and collaborative, there is an increasing need to share data and other research products in accordance with Open Science principles. In response to this need, we created an Open Science & Data Collaborations (OSDC) program at the Carnegie Mellon University Libraries that provides Open Science tools, training, collaboration opportunities, and community-building events to support Open Research and Open Science adoption. This program presents a unique end-to-end model for Open Science programs because it extends open science support beyond open repositories and open access publishing to the entire research lifecycle. We developed a logic model and a preliminary assessment metrics framework to evaluate the impact of the program activities based on existing data collected through event and workshop registrations and platform usage. The combination of these evaluation instruments has provided initial insight into our service productivity and impact. It will further help to answer more in-depth questions regarding the program impact, launch targeted surveys, and identify priority service areas and interesting Open Science projects.
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.