Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38702332›Full record

ArticleScientific data2024

A dataset for measuring the impact of research data and their curation.

Libby Hemphill, Andrea Thomer, Sara Lafia, Lizhou Fan, David Bleckley, Elizabeth Moss

Abstract readDataset
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Does the use of unusual combinations of datasets contribute to greater scientific impact?Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Libby HemphillInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48104, USA. libbyh@umich.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3793-7281
Andrea ThomerSchool of Information, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA.
Sara LafiaInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48104, USA.
Lizhou FanSchool of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48104, USA.
David BleckleyInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48104, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7715-4348
Elizabeth MossInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48104, USA.

Funding

National Science Foundation (NSF) 1930645
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Science funders, publishers, and data archives make decisions about how to responsibly allocate resources to maximize the reuse potential of research data. This paper introduces a dataset developed to measure the impact of archival and data curation decisions on data reuse. The dataset describes 10,605 social science research datasets, their curation histories, and reuse contexts in 94,755 publications that cover 59 years from 1963 to 2022. The dataset was constructed from study-level metadata, citing publications, and curation records available through the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) at the University of Michigan. The dataset includes information about study-level attributes (e.g., PIs, funders, subject terms); usage statistics (e.g., downloads, citations); archiving decisions (e.g., curation activities, data transformations); and bibliometric attributes (e.g., journals, authors) for citing publications. This dataset provides information on factors that contribute to long-term data reuse, which can inform the design of effective evidence-based recommendations to support high-impact research data curation decisions.

Identifiers

PMID38702332
PMCPMC11068764

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.