Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41048982›Full record

ArticleData in brief2025

FAIRness and data quality assessment of urban air quality monitoring datasets: Perspective on insights from F-UJI evaluation.

M S B Syed, Paula Kelly, Paul Stacey, Damon Berry

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Data in brief, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

M S B SyedSchool of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, Technological University Dublin, Dublin D07 EWV4, Ireland.
Paula KellySchool of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, Technological University Dublin, Dublin D07 EWV4, Ireland.
Paul StaceySchool of Mechanical Engineering, Technological University Dublin, Dublin D07 EWV4, Ireland.
Damon BerrySchool of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, Technological University Dublin, Dublin D07 EWV4, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advancements in information technology have supported the open availability of environmental monitoring datasets to aid global initiatives such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs). Despite these efforts, challenges concerning data quality and adherence to FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles continue to restrict the effective reuse of such datasets, particularly for secondary applications. This study uses the F-UJI assessment tool and a set of eight established DQ dimensions to evaluate the FAIRness and Data Quality (DQ) of four publicly available urban air quality monitoring datasets from international agencies. Each dataset was assessed against 17 FAIR metrics and scored accordingly. The FAIR assessments revealed moderate to low levels of compliance across datasets, with Reusable scores ranging from 2 to 3 out of 10, and Interoperability often being the weakest dimension. DQ analysis showed recurring issues in consistency, completeness, interpretability, and traceability, particularly where metadata was poorly structured or lacked semantic depth. While the scope is limited to four datasets, the results highlight common structural and semantic deficiencies hindering data reuse. Based on these findings, the study offers targeted recommendations to support improved metadata practices and better alignment with FAIR principles within the air quality monitoring subdomain.

Indexed as

Data qualityFAIR principlesGEOSSInformation modelsMetadataOntologiesReusable environmental dataSemantic interoperability

Identifiers

PMID41048982
PMCPMC12495067

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.