Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39512561›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2024

Documenting research in simulation science to enhance understanding for reusability.

Sibylle Hermann, Jörg Fehr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 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. 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

2 authors.

Sibylle HermannInstitute of Engineering and Computational Mechanics, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart 70569, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9239-8789
Jörg FehrInstitute of Engineering and Computational Mechanics, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart 70569, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2850-1440

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One goal of Open Science is to promote reusability, which requires understanding and documentation. Reusability spans a spectrum from the straightforward reuse of existing materials to the extraction and adaptation of specific elements, depending on the maturity of the reused research and the research context. Beyond knowledge, understanding is crucial for enabling reusability. Simply reading an article is often insufficient; thus, publishing the underlying data and software is recommended. While the FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) facilitate the discovery and legal reuse of data and software through metadata, they fall short of promoting comprehensive understanding. By applying insights from the epistemology of simulation to computational mechanics research cases, we tested our hypothesis that the simulation process involves critical components beyond software and data that are essential to understand for reuse. Our findings indicate that reusability in these cases predominantly involves adjusting existing methodologies-a combination of different process steps from an epistemological perspective. Therefore, it is imperative to document not only learned knowledge but also the decisions regarding adjustments, assumptions and applications that concern the entire simulation process. Documentation is vital for understanding and herby enabling true reusability in scientific research, aligning with philosophical considerations of transparency and the nature of scientific knowledge.

Indexed as

documentationepistemologyreusability

Identifiers

PMID39512561
PMCPMC11541550

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.