Skip to main content
Powered by ShareScore

Find research datasets worth reusing

Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.

29

datasets available to search

ShareScore release 0.9.0

Reset

Dataset results

29 results for “Confidentiality”

Learn how ShareScore rates datasets ↗
ClinicalTrials.gov32/100

Confidential IPV Screening Tool

ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT06284148. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.

restrictedIPD-UNDECIDEDFeb 2026View details →
ClinicalTrials.gov32/100

Hybrid STTR Intervention for Heterosexuals: Anonymous Testing and Confidential Care Linkage

ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT02421159. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.

restrictedIPD-UNDECIDEDFeb 2026View details →
zenodo28/100

Exploring transparency in peer review: A study describing the content and tone of reviewers' confidential comments to editors

<p>This data set was created to conduct -&nbsp;Exploring transparency in peer review: A study describing the content and tone of reviewers&rsquo; confidential comments to editors. Prior to data collection, the study received ethical approval&nbsp;the Dutch Association for Medical Education Ethics Review Board.&nbsp; A preprint of the study is available on <a href="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.454037v1.full">bioRxiv</a>.&nbsp;</p> <p>Purpose: Recent calls to improve transparency in peer review have prompted examination of many aspects of the peer review process. Confidential comments to editors are a common component of many peer review systems that have clear implications for transparency, yet how reviewers use this component has escaped scrutiny in the published literature. Our study explores 1) how reviewers use the confidential comments section and 2) the alignment between comments to the editor and comments to authors with respect to content and tone.&nbsp;</p> <p>Methods: Our dataset consisted of 358 reviews of 168 manuscripts submitted between January 1, 2019 and August 24, 2020 to a top tier health professions education journal with a single blind review process. We first examined each review to determine whether the reviewer entered comments to the editor. Then, for the subset of reviews with comments, we used procedures consistent with conventional and directed qualitative content analysis to develop a coding scheme and code comments for content, tone, and section of the manuscript. For reviews in which the reviewer recommended reject, we coded for alignment between reviewers&rsquo; comments to the editor and to authors. We report descriptive statistics.</p> <p>Results: Nearly half of the reviews contained comments to the editor (49%). Most of these comments (n=176) summarized the reviewers&rsquo; impression of the article (85%), which could include explicit reference to their recommended decision (44%) or comments on suitability for the journal (10%). The majority of comments addressed the quality of the argument (56%) or research design, methods, or data (51%). The tone of comments to the editor tended to be critical (40%) or constructive (34%). For the 48 reviews recommending reject, the majority of comments to editor contained content that also appeared in comments to the authors (65%); additional content tended to be irrelevant to the manuscript. Tone frequently aligned (85%).</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>Conclusion: Our findings indicate variability in how reviewers use the confidential comments to editor section in online peer review systems, though generally the way they use them suggests integrity and transparency to authors.</p>

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2021View details →
dryad28/100

Data from: Clinical study reports of randomised controlled trials: an exploratory review of previously confidential industry reports

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicFeb 2013View details →
zenodo24/100

Architectural Tactics and Trade-Offs for Confidentiality

<p>The following files are available to provide material that demonstrates evidence from the experimental study and facilitates its replication:</p> <p>- Scenario MITM.pdf: This document describes the "Man in the Middle" scenario as a possible attack in a practical case involving designing and implementing a Cyber-Physical system (CPS).&nbsp;</p> <p>- Confidentiality Tactics.pdf: This is a catalog of tactics and trade-offs.</p> <p>- Experiment Results.xlsx: Document that specifies the experimental results in raw data (responses from each group), the Ground Truth, and the formulas used to calculate performance metrics.</p>

openJun 2024View details →
ClinicalTrials.gov24/100

Parental Knowledge and Attitudes of Confidential Sexually Transmitted Infections (STI) Services for Teens

ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01144871. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.

restrictedIPD-UNDECIDEDFeb 2026View details →
ClinicalTrials.gov20/100

Confidential Care and Adolescent HIV Testing

ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT06279949. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 0. Publications: 0.

closedIPD-NOFeb 2026View details →
ClinicalTrials.gov20/100

Covid 19 Pandemic. Emerging Legal and Ehical Disputes Over Patient Confidentiality

ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04344938. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 0. Publications: 0.

restrictedIPD-UNDECIDEDFeb 2026View details →
zenodo4/100

ARMA Research Office Survey 2020: Confidential datasets (restricted)

<p>Set of 3 datasets&nbsp;</p>

restrictedNov 2020View details →

ScienceDex guides

Understand access before you commit

These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.

Compare curated datasets

Allen Brain Atlas

Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.

allen-brain-atlas
neuroscienceopenDocumentation, web resources, and API references are available online.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)

ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.

abode-home-cage
behavioral-neuroscienceopenThe DataShare record exposes download links for annotations, documentation, license text, and the zipped per-snippet data directory.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

DANDI Archive for NWB datasets

DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.

dandi-nwb
electrophysiologyopenPublished Dandiset metadata and archive endpoints are available through the production DANDI API.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

International Brain Laboratory public data

The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.

ibl
behavioral-neuroscienceopenPublic sessions can be searched and loaded from the IBL public data server through ONE.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record

OpenNeuro

OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.

openneuro
neuroscienceopenPublished datasets are available on demand over the internet.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record

ScienceDex for faculty

Your academic CV and NIH biosketch

Make your CV in your school's format and your NIH biosketch from it, then download both as Word files.