The emerging complexity of Open Science: assessing Intelligent Data Openness in Genomic Anthropology and Human Genomics.

IF 1.6 2区 社会学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Paolo Anagnostou, Marco Capocasa, Francesca Brisighelli, Cinzia Battaggia, Giovanni Destro Bisol
{"title":"The emerging complexity of Open Science: assessing Intelligent Data Openness in Genomic Anthropology and Human Genomics.","authors":"Paolo Anagnostou, Marco Capocasa, Francesca Brisighelli, Cinzia Battaggia, Giovanni Destro Bisol","doi":"10.4436/JASS.99016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In recent decades, the scientific community has become aware of the importance of science being effectively open in order to speed up scientific and technological progress. In this context, the achievement of a robust, effective and responsible form of data sharing is now widely acknowledged as a fundamental part of the research process. The production and resolution of human genomic data has steadily increased in recent years, mainly due to technological advances and decreasing costs of DNA genotyping and sequencing. There is, however, a downside to this process due to the huge increase in the complexity of the data and related metadata. This means it is advisable to go beyond traditional forms of sharing analysis, which have focused on data availability only. Here we present a pilot study that aims to complement a survey on the availability of data related to peer-reviewed publications with an analysis of their findability, accessibility, useability and assessability (according to the \"intelligent data openness\" scheme). Sharing rates in genomic anthropology (73.0%) were found to be higher than human genomics (32.4%), but lower than closely related research fields (from 96.8% to 79.2% for paleogenetics and evolutionary genetics, respectively). We discuss the privacy and methodological issues that could be linked to this finding. Comparisons of sharing rates across a wide range of disciplines has suggested that the idea of human genomics as a forerunner for the open data movement should be questioned. Finally, both in genomic anthropology and human genomics, findability and useability were found to be compliant with the expectations of an intelligent data openness, whereas only a minor part of studies met the need to make the data completely assessable.</p>","PeriodicalId":48668,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anthropological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4436/JASS.99016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent decades, the scientific community has become aware of the importance of science being effectively open in order to speed up scientific and technological progress. In this context, the achievement of a robust, effective and responsible form of data sharing is now widely acknowledged as a fundamental part of the research process. The production and resolution of human genomic data has steadily increased in recent years, mainly due to technological advances and decreasing costs of DNA genotyping and sequencing. There is, however, a downside to this process due to the huge increase in the complexity of the data and related metadata. This means it is advisable to go beyond traditional forms of sharing analysis, which have focused on data availability only. Here we present a pilot study that aims to complement a survey on the availability of data related to peer-reviewed publications with an analysis of their findability, accessibility, useability and assessability (according to the "intelligent data openness" scheme). Sharing rates in genomic anthropology (73.0%) were found to be higher than human genomics (32.4%), but lower than closely related research fields (from 96.8% to 79.2% for paleogenetics and evolutionary genetics, respectively). We discuss the privacy and methodological issues that could be linked to this finding. Comparisons of sharing rates across a wide range of disciplines has suggested that the idea of human genomics as a forerunner for the open data movement should be questioned. Finally, both in genomic anthropology and human genomics, findability and useability were found to be compliant with the expectations of an intelligent data openness, whereas only a minor part of studies met the need to make the data completely assessable.

开放科学的新兴复杂性:评估基因组人类学和人类基因组学中的智能数据开放性。
近几十年来,科学界已经意识到科学有效开放对于加快科技进步的重要性。在此背景下,实现稳健、有效和负责任的数据共享形式已被广泛视为研究过程的基本组成部分。近年来,人类基因组数据的生产和分辨率稳步提高,这主要是由于技术进步以及 DNA 基因分型和测序成本的降低。然而,由于数据和相关元数据的复杂性大幅增加,这一过程也存在弊端。这意味着我们应该超越只关注数据可用性的传统共享分析形式。在此,我们介绍一项试点研究,该研究旨在通过对可查找性、可访问性、可使用性和可评估性(根据 "智能数据开放性 "计划)的分析,对同行评议出版物相关数据的可用性调查进行补充。结果发现,基因组人类学的共享率(73.0%)高于人类基因组学(32.4%),但低于密切相关的研究领域(古遗传学和进化遗传学的共享率分别为 96.8% 和 79.2%)。我们讨论了可能与这一发现有关的隐私和方法问题。对众多学科共享率的比较表明,人类基因组学作为开放数据运动先驱的观点应该受到质疑。最后,在基因组人类学和人类基因组学中,可查找性和可使用性都符合对智能数据开放的期望,而只有一小部分研究满足了使数据完全可评估的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Anthropological Sciences
Journal of Anthropological Sciences Social Sciences-Anthropology
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: The Journal of Anthropological Sciences (JASs) publishes reviews, original papers and notes concerning human paleontology, prehistory, biology and genetics of extinct and extant populations. Particular attention is paid to the significance of Anthropology as an interdisciplinary field of research. Only papers in English can be considered for publication. All contributions are revised by the editorial board together with the panel of referees.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信