Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38875230›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Understanding the value of curation: A survey of US data repository curation practices and perceptions.

Lisa R Johnston, Renata Curty, Susan M Braxton, Jake Carlson, Hannah Hadley, Sophia Lafferty-Hess, Hoa Luong, Jonathan L Petters, Wendy A Kozlowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Embedding FAIR Data Practices in Shared Core Resource Facilities.Journal of biomolecular techniques : JBT · 2026
    Review
  3. FAIR Omics Data Management: Overview, Challenges, and Best Practices.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  4. 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

9 authors.

Lisa R JohnstonData, Academic Planning & Institutional Research, University of Wisconsin Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America.
Renata CurtyResearch Data Services, Library, University of California Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4615-6030
Susan M BraxtonUniversity Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois, United States of America.
Jake CarlsonUniversity Libraries, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2733-0969
Hannah HadleyResearch and Teaching Services, Library, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, United States of America.
Sophia Lafferty-HessUniversity Libraries Center for Data and Visualization Sciences, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8343-3279
Hoa LuongUniversity Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois, United States of America.
Jonathan L PettersData Management and Curation Services, Data Services, University Libraries, Virginia Tech, Virginia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0853-5814
Wendy A KozlowskiResearch Data and Open Scholarship, Cornell University Library, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6539-3798

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Data curators play an important role in assessing data quality and take actions that may ultimately lead to better, more valuable data products. This study explores the curation practices of data curators working within US-based data repositories. We performed a survey in January 2021 to benchmark the levels of curation performed by repositories and assess the perceived value and impact of curation on the data sharing process. Our analysis included 95 responses from 59 unique data repositories. Respondents primarily were professionals working within repositories and examined curation performed within a repository setting. A majority 72.6% of respondents reported that "data-level" curation was performed by their repository and around half reported their repository took steps to ensure interoperability and reproducibility of their repository's datasets. Curation actions most frequently reported include checking for duplicate files, reviewing documentation, reviewing metadata, minting persistent identifiers, and checking for corrupt/broken files. The most "value-add" curation action across generalist, institutional, and disciplinary repository respondents was related to reviewing and enhancing documentation. Respondents reported high perceived impact of curation by their repositories on specific data sharing outcomes including usability, findability, understandability, and accessibility of deposited datasets; respondents associated with disciplinary repositories tended to perceive higher impact on most outcomes. Most survey participants strongly agreed that data curation by the repository adds value to the data sharing process and that it outweighs the effort and cost. We found some differences between institutional and disciplinary repositories, both in the reported frequency of specific curation actions as well as the perceived impact of data curation. Interestingly, we also found variation in the perceptions of those working within the same repository regarding the level and frequency of curation actions performed, which exemplifies the complexity of a repository curation work. Our results suggest data curation may be better understood in terms of specific curation actions and outcomes than broadly defined curation levels and that more research is needed to understand the resource implications of performing these activities. We share these results to provide a more nuanced view of curation, and how curation impacts the broader data lifecycle and data sharing behaviors.

Indexed as

Data CurationData AccuracyDatabases, FactualHumansInformation DisseminationReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID38875230
PMCPMC11178225

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.