Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded bySusanna-Assunta Sansone
RDA17 FAIRsharing WG sessions: on repositories and policies
The document discusses the Fairsharing Registry and its efforts to harmonize data policies, standards, and repository features. It emphasizes the need for alignment between funder and publisher policies to enhance data sharing and improve repository transparency and trustworthiness. Collaborative initiatives are highlighted to map repository functionalities and to ensure the accessibility and discoverability of critical data resources.
More Related Content
Similar to RDA17 FAIRsharing WG sessions: on repositories and policies
RDA17 FAIRsharing WG sessions: on repositories and policies
- 1. Repository features, looking forconvergence Susanna-Assunta Sansone ORCiD: 0000-0001-5306-5690 | Twitter: @SusannaASansone datareadiness.eng.ox.ac.uk Associate Professor, Information Engineering Associate Director, Oxford e-Research Centre INCF Neuroscience Assembly, 26 April 2021 Slides: https://www.slideshare.net/SusannaSansone
- 2. RDA/Force11 FAIRsharing RegistryWG: Connecting data policies, standards and databases https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/fairsharing-registry-connecting-data-policies-standards-databases.html
- 3. Guides consumers todiscover, select and use these resources with confidence Helps producers to make their resources visible, more widely adopted and cited RDA/Force11 FAIRsharing WG - endorsed outputs Registry Recommendations
- 4. COVID-19 WG … 530resources (standards, policies and databases) https://fairsharing.org/collection/RDACovid19WG
- 6.
- 7.
- 8. FAIRsharing - threeexamples of use
- 9. RDA/Force11 FAIRsharing WG- community request Use and adoption has also led to requests (from user communities) to improve the resource metadata descriptors that stakeholders want to see in the registry Current activities are: 1. Map repositories features across initiatives a. Session by FAIRsharing WG 2. Align data policy from funders and publishers a. Joint session between Funders IG, Data Policy Standardization IG, and FAIRsharing WG Funders IG Policy IG FAIRsharing WG
- 10. Policy alignment session- motivation and objectives Objectives ● Examine funder-publisher policy alignment and provide recommendations on how to improve alignment Rationale ● Funder and publisher policies influence and motivate data sharing by researchers ● Need for policy alignment in order for research data policies to be maximally effective Initial policy areas of focus ● Data availability statements and data deposit requirements
- 11. Policy alignment -plan Phase 1 – Research and analysis ● Conduct research into funder-publisher policy alignment Phase 2 – Recommendations to Improve Policy Alignment ● Engage stakeholders to discuss current state of policy alignment ● Develop recommendations to improve policy alignment iteratively Phase 3 – Application of the reccomendations ● Disseminate the recommendations, explore approaches pilot projects, and consider how the recommendations could be used as a basis for continued policy alignment ● The FAIRsharing registry will prototype the policy templates putting them into action, making these (harmonized) policies discoverable and comparable
- 12. FAIRsharing registry: policydashboard https://fairsharing.org/reco mmendation/ScientificData
- 13.
- 14. FAIRsharing registry: policycomparison
- 15. FAIRsharing registry: policycomparison using TOP
- 16. We can (all)do more By harmonizing the description of the policies, we make them more discoverable, comparable and clearer, promoting data availability, deposition and reuse and guiding researchers to meet these goals
- 17. Repository feature session- motivation and objectives There are a number of initiatives that have defined features that: ● help users and other stakeholders understand what functionalities repositories offer, ● help provide criteria to formally certify repositories, based on trustworthiness and FAIRness, ● can be used to define good practices to assist repositories to evaluate and improve their current operations ○ ELIXIR Indicators (2017); CTS certification (set up as entity in 2018); Publishers features (from 2019); TRUST principles (2020); COAR guidelines (2020); USA NIH repositories characteristics (2021); Science Europe criteria for trustworthy repositories (2021) Scope of this session and relevance to this WG: ● Can we map the landscape of these initiatives? Bring them together, raise awareness, understand their scope and motivation. ● Can we identify a common set of metadata descriptors? Those that all stakeholders want to see in FAIRsharing and other registries of repositories.
- 18. Presentations ● Publisher features- Matt Cannon, Taylor & Francis; and Chris Graf, Wiley ● ELIXIR - Sirarat Sarntivijai, ELIXIR ● Core Trust Seal - Mustapha Mokrane, CoreTrustSeal ● Science Europe - Marie Timmermann, Science Europe ● TRUST - Dawei Lin, NIH ● COAR - Kathleen Shearer, COAR ● NIH - Jerry Sheehan, NIH NLM
- 19. Publisher view Repository Featuresto Help Researchers Matt Cannon, Taylor & Francis Chris Graf, Wiley Iain Hrynaszkiewicz, Emma Ganley PLOS Varsha Khodiyar Springer Nature, Research Data Wei Mun Chan eLife Nick Everitt,Matthew Cannon Taylor and Francis Scott Edmunds GigaScience Molly Cranston, Guillaume Wright, Hollydawn Murray F1000Research Kathryn Sharples, Chris Graf Wiley Thomas Lemberger EMBO Press Marina Soares Silva, Ilaria Carnevale, Sarah Callaghan Elsevier Catriona MacCallum Hindawi Kiera McNeice Cambridge University Press Adam Leary Oxford University Press https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4683794
- 20. Motivation and mappingto other efforts - Publishers have been rolling out data sharing policies in receptive communities for a number of years. A large part of what is needed is resources and training for researchers on many topics, including DAS, data citation, and selecting repositories - Publishers already provide information about how to select repositories to authors - both on webpages and in response to email queries. However the level of detail and subject coverage is highly varied and not transparent.
- 21. ELIXIR CDR Recognising theCore Data Resources https://elixir-europe.org/platforms/data/core-data-resources Sirarat Sarntivijai Data and Interoperability Coordinator, ELIXIR https://f1000research.com/articles/5-2422/v2
- 22. Motivation and adoptionby the Global Biodata Coalition https://globalbiodata.org/
- 23. CoreTrustSeal view Mustapha Mokrane, CoreTrustSeal Boardmember Trustworthiness is at the center of the relationship between a Digital Preservation Repository and its Designated Community of users. A Trustworthy Digital Repository (TDR) mission is to preserve digital objects for the long-term and ensure their understandability and reusability to their Designated Community. A certified Trustworthy Digital Repository is transparently and verifiably assessed.
- 24. 1. Core Requirementsfor Trustworthy Data Repositories (TDRs) ● Define the essential characteristics of TDRs ● Based on the OAIS Reference Model (ISO 14721) ● International and multidisciplinary consensus ● Reviewed every 3 years 2. CoreTrustSeal Certification ● Peer-reviewed self-assessment ● Public evidence based and transparent ● Certifications are valid for 3 years ● International and non-profit community effort Coverage 68 Humanities & Social Sciences 49 Natural Sciences 29 Life Sciences 16 Engineering Sciences
- 25. Science Europe RDM guidanceshould always put researchers’ needs first! Marie Timmermann Senior Policy Officer, Science Europe scieur.org/rdm European association representing the interests of major public research funding organisations (RFOs) and research performing organisations (RPOs) that foster excellent, ground-breaking research in Europe.
- 26. Motivations Provide direct supportto researchers: Researchers need to be able to identify trustworthy repositories that respond to the needs of their specific project. Aligning RPOs’ and RFOs’ support for their researchers: Science Europe believes in the value of aligned policies and practices. RPOs and RFOs are the first point of contact for researchers and best suited to guide their choices of repositories. Be as inclusive as possible Take into account existing valuable initiatives Leave the necessary flexibility to researchers, their organisations and their funders Published in January 2019
- 27. TRUST Principles for Digital Repositories Dr.Dawei Lin, Ph.D. Division of Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation, NIAID, NIH [email protected] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0486-7
- 28. Relationship between TRUSTwith other efforts ● Make it easy to understand the importance of Trustworthy Digital Repositories ● Develop concise and measurable approaches to achieve Trustworthy Digital Repositories ● NOT to replace any standards, criteria, or best practices ● Provide a high-level starting point for advocating, supporting and implementing all certifications and assessments
- 29. NIH view Jerry Sheehan,NIH NLM
- 30. Motivations What was thereason for convening this work/project/certification effort?
- 31. COAR Community Framework forGood Practices in Repositories Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director COAR
- 32. • Willingness towork together • Identify core characteristics only • Bring all parties, repositories as well as all relevant registries • Features (as functionality to adopt) vs best practices (guidelines for improvements) • We need to distinguish and better define them • Be very sensitive on how we apply these things • We have still a long way to go for a good data quality ecosystem • Repository landscape is evolving so we shouldn’t fix these criteria • These should reflect researchers need • Next and onging steps • Writing a summary this discussion with speakers and interested parties • Register on the FAIRsharing WG list, to make sure we can engage with you • Discuss the creation of a new IG or WG to do this work Repository feature session - conclusion
- 33. We are allrepresentatives of key parts of the scholarly community, and we must not forget that we are all here to support researchers that are ultimately at the centre of this, it seems imperative that we all move towards a much more understanding and collaborative approach We can (all) do more