ArticleScientific data2025
Opening doors to physical sample tracking and attribution in Earth and environmental sciences.
Article in Scientific data, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing FAIR data towards comparable, organized, predictive AI-ready data for community validation.Communications biology · 2026Review
- Integrating biological and environmental data to solve key scientific and societal challenges.Bioscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Physical samples and their associated data and metadata underpin scientific discoveries across disciplines and can enable new science when appropriately archived. However, there are significant gaps in current practices and infrastructure that prevent accurate provenance tracking, reproducibility, and attribution. For most samples, descriptive metadata are often sparse, inaccessible, or absent. Samples and associated data and metadata may also be scattered across numerous physical collections, data repositories, laboratories, data files, and papers with no clear linkage or provenance tracking as new information is generated over time. The Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP) Physical Samples Curation Cluster has therefore developed guidance for scientific authors on 'Publishing Open Research Using Physical Samples.' This involved synthesizing existing practices, gathering community feedback, and assessing real-world examples. We identified improvements needed to enable authors to efficiently cite and link Earth science samples and related data, and track their use. Our goal is to help improve discoverability, interoperability, and reuse of physical samples, and associated data and metadata. Though primarily focused on the needs of Earth and environmental sciences, these guidelines are broadly applicable.
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.