ArticleOpen research Europe2025
Understanding and advancing research software grant funding models.
Article in Open research Europe, 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.
- Article
- Evolving funding strategies for research software: Insights from an international survey of research funders.PloS one · 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
Research software funding currently operates across a disconnected landscape of public and private grant-making organizations, leading to inefficiencies for software projects and the broader research community. The lack of coordination forces projects to pursue multiple, often overlapping opportunities, and forces funders to independently evaluate projects and proposals, resulting in duplicated effort and suboptimal resource distribution. By examining existing collaboration models, including centralized and distributed approaches, we highlight how joint decision-making mechanisms could improve sustainability for reusable software resources. An international set of examples illustrates how cross-organization cooperation for research software funding can be structured. Such collaborations can optimize grant disbursement and align priorities. Increased collaboration could allow funders to better address the ongoing maintenance and evolution of research software, lowering barriers that hamper discovery across multiple research domains. Encouraging both bottom-up user-driven and top-down coordination mechanisms ultimately supports more robust, widely accessible research software, improving global research outcomes.
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.