ArticleRoyal Society open science2024
Opening science to society: how to progress societal engagement into (open) science policies.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2024. 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 Science, Health Data and Epistemic Harms: A Multidisciplinary Reflection.Data science journal · 2026Article
- Review
- Implementing is necessary: the gap between discourse and practice in global open science.Brazilian oral research · 2026Review
- Article
- Citizen science powers wetland restoration.Environmental science and ecotechnology · 2026Review
- Navigating the participatory turn in agricultural and food research: Best practice from citizen science.Ambio · 2025Article
- Towards an inclusive Open Science: examining EDI and public participation in policy documents across Europe and the Americas.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Open Science Practices in Integrated Assessment Models.Open research Europe · 2025Article
- Opening science to society: how to progress societal engagement into (open) science policies.Royal Society open science · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A broad understanding of the aims and objectives of the international open science movement was recently adopted with the 2021 UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science, expanding the focus of open science to include scientific knowledge, infrastructures, knowledge systems and the open engagement of societal actors. In response, recent discussions on science policy practice are shifting to the implementation of open science via national policies. While policy instruments to support some aspects of open science are well-studied, guidance on the emerging 'social' aspects of open science has lagged, prompting UNESCO to generate guidance. In this paper, several authors of the UNESCO Open Science Toolkit guidance document on 'Engaging societal actors in Open Science' synthesize the scholarly underpinnings behind its recommendations. This work draws upon a targeted search from academic, policy, and grey literature in the fields of open science and community engagement, with a special focus on citizen science, to derive guidance on how to overcome barriers to the uptake of societal engagement approaches. The results present building blocks of what an enabling environment for the open engagement of societal actors could look like, identifying key considerations and reflecting on opportunities and challenges for progressing and evaluating sound open engagement of societal actors into regional & national (open) science policies.
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.