ArticleScientific reports2025
Addressing biomedical data challenges and opportunities to inform a large-scale data lifecycle for enhanced data sharing, interoperability, analysis, and collaboration across stakeholders.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- FAIR by design (TRACE): A Trusted Research Access & Collaboration Environment.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- A data navigation model to improve access to research data resources in clinical and translational science.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Insights into the Datasets, Tools, and Training Needs of the AnVIL Community: 2024.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- The Rise of Generalist Foundation Models and Quantum Computing in Oncology.Technology in cancer research & treatmentReview
- Federated learning-based virtual dual-energy CT generation from single-energy CT for gout detection.Digital healthArticle
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
Biomedical discovery is fraught with challenges stemming from diverse data types and siloed analysis. In this study, we explored common biomedical data tasks and pain points that could be addressed to elevate data quality, enhance sharing, streamline analysis, and foster collaboration across stakeholders. We recruited fifteen professionals from various biomedical roles and industries to participate in sixty-minute semi-structured interviews, which involved an assessment of their challenges, needs, and tasks as well as a brainstorm exercise to validate each professional's research process. We applied a qualitative analysis of individual interviews using an inductive-deductive thematic coding approach for emerging themes. We identified a common set of challenges related to procuring and validating data, applying new analysis techniques and navigating varied computational environments, distributing results effectively and reproducibly, and managing the flow of data across phases of the data lifecycle. Our findings emphasize the importance of secure data sharing and facilities for collaboration throughout the discovery process. Our identified pain points provide researchers with an opportunity to align workstreams and enhance research data lifecycles to conduct biomedical discovery. We conclude our study with a summary of key actionable recommendations to tackle multiomic data challenges across the stages and phases of biomedical discovery.
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.