ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Construction of medical scientific data repositories in China: analysis of survey and recommendations.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 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.
- A Four-Wavelength Photoplethysmography dataset for non-invasive hemoglobin assessment.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Psychological determinants of participation in the sharing economy: a cross-cultural study of the U.S. and China.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In the context of global open science trends, medical open-access repositories (OARs) promote transparency in research and facilitate the sharing of scientific data. The increase in scientific output necessitates a robust infrastructure to enhance OARs in China. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate medical open-access repositories (OARs) in China that are indexed in re3data.org and OpenDOAR.org. The study analyzed data classification, descriptions, retrieval, and the utilization of selected repositories. Methods: This study ascertained the current status of the Chinese medical OARs by visiting their respective websites and attempted to identify the disciplinary orientation of each OAR. A content analysis approach was utilized to achieve this study's objective. Twelve Chinese medical open-access repositories were selected from re3data.org and OpenDOAR.org to examine how their information is organized. The data were collected manually from May 1 to 30, 2023, and analyzed using various quantitative techniques to understand the current status of medical scientific repositories in China. Results: Based on the results, this study proposed the following recommendations: (1) implement multi-dimensional data classification, (2) use persistent data identifiers, (3) formalize the description metadata, (4) enhance advanced retrieval and result set filtering functions, and (5) optimize the preview and interaction features of data repositories. Conclusion: The scope of this study is restricted to the medical open-access repositories in China as listed on re3data.org and OpenDOAR.org. Therefore, the results of this study are only generalizable within China. The primary focus of research output in China is on medical open-access repositories. This study is essential for assessing China's current status in research data management within the medical field and its distribution infrastructure in global open science trends.
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.