Skip to content

ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

AHRECS icon
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Exclude terms...
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
AHRECS
Analysis
Animal ethics
Animal Ethics Committee
Animal handling
Animal housing
Animal Research Ethics
Animal Welfare
ANZCCART
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
Big data
Big data
Biobank
Bioethics
Biomedical
Biospecimens
Breaches
Cartoon/Funny
Case studies
Clinical trial
Collaborative research
Conflicts of interest
Consent
Controversy/Scandal
Controversy/Scandal
Creative
Culture
Data management
Database
Dual-use
Essential Reading
Ethical review
Ethnography
Euthanasia
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
Even though i
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
Get off Gary Play man of the dog
Good practice
Guidance
Honesty
HREC
Human research ethics
Humanities
Institutional responsibilities
International
Journal
Justice
Links
Media
Medical research
Merit and integrity
Methodology
Monitoring
New Zealand
News
Online research
Peer review
Performance
Primary materials
Principles
Privacy
Protection for participants
Psychology
Publication ethics
Questionable Publishers
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
Research Misconduct
Research results
Researcher responsibilities
Resources
Respect for persons
Sample paperwork
sd
se
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
x
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Animal Ethics Biosafety Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

Data Sets Are Foundational to Research. Why Don’t We Cite Them? – EOS (Suresh Vannan | November 2020)

Posted by Dr Gary Allen in Research Integrity on November 25, 2020
Keywords: Authorship, Data management, Good practice, Research integrity, Researcher responsibilities
Wordcloud around the word "DATA"

The lack of clear references to and descriptions of data sets in published literature limits the usefulness of data, as well as the reproducibility and credibility of scientific findings.

Scientific researchers are instructed from the very beginning of their training about the importance of citing previously published literature and carefully documenting methods. We are taught that this corroborating information forms a solid foundation on which to rest our claims and conclusions. Citing data sets in the same manner, however, is another story. Although researchers have enthusiastically embraced digital data archives that can be shared and updated easily, they do not always cite data sets from these resources in their publications in ways that facilitate verification and replication of their results—or the assembly of metrics to gauge how the data sets are used.

We need a renewed approach to promote, educate about, and enforce citation of data sets in manuscripts—and to improve the specificity with which they are described.

Benefits of data set citation include improved reproducibility (particularly when the exact version of data used is indicated) and credibility of research, and clarification about the provenance and use of—and the proper credit for—data. Readers of scientific literature, including researchers, funding agencies, and promotional committees, rely on data set citation for information about data set usage. These metrics are extremely important in assessing the impact of a given body of work and of the facilities that publish and deliver data to the scientific community. Improper, incorrect, and incomplete data set citation hinders such assessments.

Publishers and data repositories have made significant progress over the past decade in increasing awareness of data set citation, and science policy bodies such as AGU have recommended the practice. Despite extensive awareness efforts by such groups, however, we observe a shortage of clear references to cited data in published scientific literature. We need a renewed approach to promote, educate about, and enforce citation of data sets in manuscripts—and to improve the specificity with which they are described.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

Related Reading

Articles Are the Fundamental Unit of Data Sharing – Scholarly Kitchen (Tim Vines | September 2020)

Indigenous Data Sovereignty in the era of Big Data and Open Data (Papers: Maggie Walter, et al | October 2020)

The data-index: an author-level metric that values impactful data and incentivises data sharing (Pre-Print Paper: View OAmelia S C Hood & William J Sutherland | October 2020)

Threats of Bots and Other Bad Actors to Data Quality Following Research Participant Recruitment Through Social Media: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire (Papers: Rachel Pozzar, et al | June 2020)

The Surgisphere Scandal: What Went Wrong? – The Scientist (Catherine Offord | October 2020)

(Russia) Leading Scientists Question ‘Highly Improbable’ Russian Vaccine Results Published in Lancet – The Moscow Times (Pjotr Sauer and Jake Cordell | September 2020)

(US) Following court ruling, NIH warns drug and device companies to post missing trial data – STAT News (Lev Facher | August 2020)

(Australia and Canada) ‘How I got fooled’: The story behind the retraction of a study of gamers – Retraction Watch (Leto Sapunar | June 2020)

(UK) Misconduct allegations push psychology hero off his pedestal – Science (Cathleen O’Grady | July 2020)

Covid-19 studies based on flawed Surgisphere data force medical journals to review processes – The Guardian (Melissa Davey | June 2020)

Column: How a retracted research paper contaminated global coronavirus research – Los Angles Times (Michael Hiltzik | June 2020)

(Italy) There is no I in data: Former grad student has paper retracted after mentor objects – Retraction Watch (Adam Marcus | June 2020)

No raw data, no science: another possible source of the reproducibility crisis (Papers: Tsuyoshi Miyakawa | February 2020)

Data retention scheme is being abused exactly as critics predicted | Crikey (Bernard Keane | February 2020)

(US) Federal judge rules clinical trial sponsors must publish a decade’s worth of missing data – STAT (Lev Facher | February 2020)

(UK) Data From A Top Geneticist’s Lab Was Flagged To A Major UK University. It Didn’t Launch A Formal Investigation Until A Decade Later – Buzzfeed (Peter Aldhous | January 2020)

1.2 Billion Records Found Exposed Online in a Single Server – Wired (Lily Hay Newman | November 2019)

What To Do When You Don’t Trust Your Data Anymore – Laskowski Lab at UC Davis (January 2020)

(China) ANU study says China deliberately falsifying data on organ transplants – The Canberra Times (Kirsten Lawson | November 2019)

Eleven tips for working with large data sets – Nature (Anna Nowogrodzki | January 2020)

Google health-data scandal spooks researchers – Science (Heidi Ledford | November 2019)

China Uses DNA to Map Faces, With Help From the West – New York Times ( Sui-Lee Wee & Paul Mozur | December 2019)

Sample and data sharing barriers in biobanking: consent, committees, and compromises (Paper: Flora Colledge MA, et al | December 2013)

Gazing into the Abyss of P-Hacking: HARKing vs. Optional Stopping – R-Bloggers (Angelika Stefan | November 2019)

We’re All ‘P-Hacking’ Now – Wired (Christie Aschwanden | November 2019)

Can dynamic consent facilitate the protection of biomedical big data in biobanking in Malaysia? (Papers: Mohammad Firdaus Abdul Aziz & Aimi Nadia Mohd Yusof | May 2019)

(US) Google and the University of Chicago Are Sued Over Data Sharing – New York Times (Daisuke Wakabayashi | June 2019)

Why We Need Guidelines for Brain Scan Data – Wired (Evan D. Morris | September 2019)

Data sharing and how it can benefit your scientific career – Nature (Gabriel Popkin | May 2019)

Better Metadata Could Help Save The World! – Scholarly Kitchen (Alice Meadows | June 2019)

Open consent, biobanking and data protection law: can open consent be ‘informed’ under the forthcoming data protection regulation? (Papers: Dara Hallinan & Michael Friedewald | 2015)

Incorporating Exclusion Clauses into Informed Consent for Biobanking (Papers: Zubin Master and David B. Resnik)

Credit data generators for data reuse – Nature (Heather H. Pierce, et al | June 2019)

Guest Post — Open Research in Practice: Moving from Why to How? – Scholarly Kitchen (Fiona Murphy, et al | June 2019)

(US) UCSD has not told women with HIV of data breach, despite researchers’ pleas – inewsource (Jill Castellano & Brad Racino | May 2019)

(Japan) Science retracts report on deadly Kumamoto earthquake – Retraction Watch (Ivan Oransky | May 2019)

Guest Post: Encouraging Data Sharing: A Small Investment for Large Potential Gain – Scholarly Kitchen (Rebecca Grant, et al | January 2019)

Whitepaper: Practical challenges for researchers in data sharing (David Stuart, et al | September 2018)

Move clinical trial data sharing from an option to an imperative – STAT (Rebecca Li | February 2019)

The main obstacles to better research data management and sharing are cultural. But change is in our hands – LSE Blog (Marta Teperek and Alastair Dunning | November 2018)

Recognizing Contributions and Giving Credit – EOS Editors’ Vox (Brooks Hanson and Susan Webb | August 2018)

Chinese military warns against forged data and plagiarism in science and technology research – South China Morning Post (Minnie Chan | September 2018)

Privacy in User Research: Can You? – Scholarly Kitchen (Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe | September 2018)

Was it Ethical for Dropbox to Share Customer Data with Scientists? – Wired (Emily Dreyfuss | July 2018)

Indigenous Data Sovereignty: University Institutional Review Board Policies and Guidelines and Research with American Indian and Alaska Native Communities (Papers: Tennille L. Marley | 2018)

Indigenous Data Sovereignty (Books: Edited by Tahu Kukutai and John Taylor | November 2016)

(UK) ‘Unethical not to’ submit Brexit interviews to MPs, says academic – THE (John Morgan | April 2018)

Canada sued over years of alleged experimentation on indigenous people – The Guardian (Ashifa Kassam | May 2018)

Facebook Says It Will Help Academics Use Its Data. Here’s How That’s Supposed to Work – The Chronicle of Higher Education (Nell Gluckman | April 2018)

Been scooped? A discussion on data stewardship – Musings on Quantitative Palaeoecology (Richard Telford | February 2018)

Australian agency to probe Facebook after shocking revelation – The New Daily (April 2017)

Cambridge Analytica controversy must spur researchers to update data ethics – Nature (Editorial | March 2018)

Facebook scandal: I am being used as scapegoat – academic who mined data – The Guardian (Matthew Weaver | March 2018)

Portland State University Researchers May Have Violated Federal Law by Using the Personal Data of Thousands of Portland-Area K-12 Students – Williamette Week (Katie Shepherd | March 2018)

NHMRC Open Access Policy (previously also referred to as the NHMRC Policy on the Dissemination of Research Findings)

Ethical Use of Student Data in Higher Education – Advancing the conversation

The Three Dilemmas of Data Gathering – Knowledge (Annet Aris | December 2017)

HARKing: How Badly Can Cherry-Picking and Question Trolling Produce Bias in Published Results? (Kevin R. Murphy & Herman Aguinis | 2017)

Metrics, recognition, and rewards: it’s time to incentivise the behaviours that are good for research and researchers – LSE Impact Blog (Rebecca Lawrence | November 2017)

Considering the ethics of big data research: A case of Twitter and ISIS/ISIL (Elizabeth Buchanan | December 2017)

Research reveals de-identified patient data can be re-identified – The Melbourne Newsroom (December 2017)

Opinion: Where’s the data? Missing trial results undermine pandemic preparedness – Devex (Till Bruckner | November 2017)

Who Owns Patient Data in Clinical Research? – CollabPx (Charlotte J. Haug | October 2017)

Opinion 05/2014 on Anonymisation Techniques – ARTICLE 29 DATA PROTECTION WORKING PARTY (2017)

(Australia) Caught Our Notice: Ethics, data concerns prompt another retraction for convicted researchers – Retraction Watch (Alison Abritis | November 2017)

Is it too Late for Big Data Ethics? – Forbes (Kaslev Leetaru | October 2017)

Study finds new way genome privacy can be breached – The San Diego (Bradley J. Fikes | September 2017)

What incentives increase data sharing in health and medical research? A systematic review (Papers: Anisa Rowhani-Farid, et al | May 2017)

Keep data for 10 years, say research integrity guidelines – Times Higher Education (Holly Else | June 2017)

What Is “Open Science”? (And Why Some Researchers Want It) – Futurism (Elizabeth Gilbert, Katie Corker | June 2017)

Sharing Data and Materials in Psychological Science – Sage Journals (D. Stephen Lindsay | April 2017)

Integrating the Management of Personal Data Protection and Open Science with Research Ethics (Papers: David Lewis, et al | 2017)

What Constitutes Peer Review of Data? A Survey of Peer Review Guidelines – Scholarly Kitchen (Todd A Carpenter | April 2017)

How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data (Papers: Daniele Fanelli | 2009)

What Is Big Data? A Super-Easy Intro For Everyone – LinkedIn (Bernard Marr | March 2017)

Creating a Community of Data Champions (Papers: Rosie Higman, et al | 2017)

Traditional and Electronic Informed Consent for Biobanking: A Survey of U.S. Biobanks (Papers: Simon Christian, et al 2014)

Data Ownership Guidelines (Resources: Example from an Australian school of Applied Psychology | 2016)

We must urgently clarify data-sharing rules – Nature (Jan-Eric Litton | January 2017)

Caring for Data: Law, Professional Codes and the Negotiation of Confidentiality in Australian Criminological Research. Report for the Criminology Research Council (Australia) (Papers: Robert Chalmers and Mark Israel | 2005

Beyond open data: realising the health benefits of sharing data – theBMJ (Elizabeth Pisani, et al September 2016)

Data availability statements and data citations policy: guidance for authors – NatureResearch (Guidelines/Policies)

Old Media, New Media, Data Media: Evolving Publishing Paradigms – The Scholarly Kitchen (Joseph Esposito September 2016)

The long march to open science – Horizons (Sven Titz September 2016)

Announcement: Where are the data? – Nature

Are Research Ethics Obsolete In The Era Of Big Data? (Papers: June 2016)

Perspectives on Big Data, Ethics, and Society – White Paper (Resource material: Council for Big Data, Ethics, and Society 2016)

Publicly available data on thousands of OKCupid users pulled over copyright claim – Retraction Watch (Alison McCook May 2016)

Researchers just released profile data on 70,000 OkCupid users without permission – Vox Science Health (Brian Resnick 2016)

Big Data, Little Individual: Considering the Human Side of Big Data (Michael N. Karim et al 2015)

‘Anonymity’ of the Facebook dataset – it’s Harvard College – Updated (Zimmer M 2008)

Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks (Papers: Kramer A and Hancock J 2014)

Facebook fiasco: was Cornell’s study of ‘emotional contagion’ an ethics breach? – The Guardian (Chris Chamber 2014)

Launch of the TRUST project call for competition – Enhancing better ethical practices in research

Ashley Madison Hack Creates Ethical Conundrum For Researchers – Huffington Post (Joe Satran 2015)

Is it ethical to use data from Nazi medical experiments? – The Conversation (Lynn Gillam, 2015)

Guidelines for the Ethical use of Digital Data in Human Research

Six Provocations for Big Data (Journal: danah boyd and Kate Crawford, 2011)

‘We Need to Take a Look at the Data’: How 2 Persistent Grad Students Upended a Blockbuster Study – The Chronicle of Higher Education

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Links

Complaints against Research Ethics Monthly

Request a Takedown

Submission Guidelines

About the Research Ethics Monthly

About subscribing to the Research Ethics Monthly

A diverse group discussing a topic

Random selected image from the AHRECS library. These were all purchased from iStockPhoto. These are images we use in our workshops and Dr Allen used in the GUREM.

Research Ethics Monthly Receive copies of the Research Ethics Monthly directly
by email. We will never spam you.

  • Enter the answer as a word
  • Hidden
    This field is hidden and only used for import to Mailchimp
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map
  • Site Map

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in