ArticleOpen research Europe2026
Training resources on open and responsible research and innovation (Open RRI): gaps, quality and opportunities to advance training.
Article in Open research Europe, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
33 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Open Science (OS) and Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) are increasingly converging under the concept of Open RRI, which integrates openness with inclusivity, responsibility, and societal engagement. Strengthening researcher skills in this area requires a clear understanding of existing training provision. This study presents findings from the Horizon Europe project PATTERN, which mapped and assessed Open RRI training resources across Europe. Methods: A mixed-methods approach was applied, combining desk research, surveys, semi-structured interviews, data workshops, and mutual learning events. In total, 571 training resources were identified and analysed across eight skill areas: Open Access; FAIR Data; Citizen Science; Research Integrity; Gender, Non-discrimination, and Inclusion; Dissemination and Exploitation; Science Communication; and Management and Leadership. A subset of resources was further evaluated using defined quality criteria. Results: The mapping reveals a fragmented and uneven training landscape, with a strong predominance of introductory-level resources and limited provision for intermediate and advanced learners. Training is often generic and lacks contextualisation, with gaps in inclusivity, multilingual provision, and local adaptation. Quality assessment highlights strengths such as modular design, open licensing, and the use of active learning approaches. However, recurring challenges include limited accessibility, unclear pathways for reuse, and difficulties in implementation and long-term sustainability. Key thematic gaps include intersectionality, policy engagement, supervision ethics, and the integration of indigenous and local knowledge. Conclusions: Despite growing availability of training resources, significant gaps remain in scope, depth, and inclusivity. Addressing these challenges requires improved coordination, expansion of advanced and context-sensitive training, enhanced multilingual accessibility, and stronger integration into curricula and institutional practices to support sustainable Open RRI capacity building.
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.