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.
660
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
660 results for “compliance”
Analyzing Cookies Compliance with the GDPR
<p>Dataset for the Master's thesis of Dino Bollinger: Analyzing Cookies Compliance with the GDPR</p> <p>We recommend navigating to a newer version from the USENIX paper (Automating Cookie Consent and GDPR Violation Detection) at https://zenodo.org/record/5568491.</p>
Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Open Access Compliance Monitoring 2021
<p><strong>I. Executive summary</strong></p> <p>The Austrian Science Fund (FWF), which is Austria's main funding organisation for basic research, encourages and helps all project leaders and project staff members to make their peer-reviewed research results freely available on the Internet. Any exceptions must be clearly indicated and justified. For projects that started after 1 January 2015, open access has been compulsory for all peer-reviewed publications. All principal investigators in FWF-funded projects are obliged to submit a final report within four months of completing their projects.</p> <p>In 2021, a total of 584 final reports were submitted to the FWF, 48 of which could not report any publications so far. The publications and other data mentioned in those reports are archived and analysed by the FWF. This report examines the state of compliance with open access requirements for peer-reviewed publications on the basis of final project reports submitted in the year 2021.</p> <p>Main findings:</p> <p>-A total of 7,025 publications were listed in the final project reports submitted in 2021.</p> <p>-Of those publications, 5,735 were conclusively identified as peer-reviewed.</p> <p>-Regarding compliance with the FWF's Open Access Policy, the analysis shows that 82% of the peer-reviewed publications listed in the final project reports submitted in 2021 were openly accessible (2015: 83%, 2016: 92%, 2017: 90%, 2018: 92%, 2019: 89%, 2020: 84%).</p> <p>-The most frequently chosen option was hybrid open access (39%). The share of gold open access was 23%, the share of green open access 20%, and no open access 18%.</p> <p>-The majority of peer-reviewed publications submitted were journal articles (85%), 86% of which were openly accessible.</p> <p>-The lowest rate of compliance with the FWF's Open Access Policy could be found in editions, contributions to edited volumes, and monographs (50%).</p> <p>-The absolute number of publications listed in final reports in 2021 included 403 publications that were mentioned several times in different projects; however, those repetitions did not ultimately affect the relative share of open access publications (81%).</p> <p>II. Bias</p> <p>Most of the publications were submitted to the FWF via a research documentation system (provided by ©Researchfish), in which FWF-funded researchers are able to enter and update their research data on an ongoing basis. The last check of the open access status was performed in March 2022. In some cases, the embargo period may have already expired, and publications labelled ‘closed’ in the FWF’s database may now be accessible through green open access.</p> <p>Whenever the status ‘peer-reviewed’ could not be clearly identified according to the FWF’s guidelines, the publications were classified as non-peer reviewed.</p> <p>Openly available non-peer reviewed publications were entered as 'openly available’.</p>
Data from: Protecting great apes from disease: compliance with measures to reduce anthroponotic disease transmission
<p><span>Based on an international sample of past (N=420) and potential future visitors (N=569) to wild great ape tourism sites in Africa, we used an online questionnaire to characterise visitors' practices, assess expectations (e.g., about proximity to great apes) and identify key factors related to potential compliance with disease mitigation measures. This was implemented adapting a framework from health literature (the Health Belief Model; HBM), particularly focused on reducing COVID-19 transmission at an early stage of the pandemic.</span></p>
Supplementary Material for A Metrics Suite for Quantifying Legal Compliance of Smart Contracts
<p>This repository contains the supplementary material for the paper titled "A Metrics Suite for Quantifying Legal Compliance of Smart Contracts". It includes natural-language legal contracts, their smart contract implementations, Petri net models of said contracts, and their reachability graphs. The Petri net models are presented as graphics, as well as .cpn files that can be opened with either <a href="https://cpntools.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CPN Tools</a> or <a href="https://cpnide.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CPN IDE</a>.</p>
Patent Working Requirements and Complex Products: An Empirical Assessment of India's Form 27 Practice and Compliance
<p>Dataset of the first comprehensive and systematic analysis of 4,916 valid Statements of Working (Form 27) corresponding to 3,126 patents pertaining to mobile technology in India. Released under the Creative Commons-Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 (CC-BY-SA 4.0) License as a part of the <strong>Pervasive Technologies</strong> project at the <strong>Centre for Internet and Society, India</strong>.</p> <p>For the detailed methodology used for this study, refer to <a href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/methodology-statements-of-working-form-27-of-indian-mobile-device-patents">Methodology: Statements of Working (Form 27) of Indian Mobile Device Patents</a>.</p> <p>For information on how to read this dataset, refer to the section "Detailed legend and process of logging the results" in the methodology.</p> <p>A paper titled "<a href="http://jipel.law.nyu.edu/vol-7-no-1-1-contreras/"><strong>Patent Working Requirements and Complex Products</strong></a>" authored by Prof. Jorge Contreras and Rohini Lakshané, first published in July 2017 presents an analysis of the dataset.</p> <p>The patents chosen to be included in this dataset are a subset of the patents found in another study by the same authors, Patents and Mobile Devices in India: An Empirical Survey.</p> <p>Data is provided AS-IS, without warranty as to accuracy or completeness.</p> <p>All uses of the accompanying data and modifications and derivatives thereof must contain the following attribution: "Data provided by Jorge L. Contreras and Rohini Lakshané (2017)"</p>
Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Open Access Compliance Monitoring 2017
<p><strong>I. Executive summary</strong></p> <p>The Austrian Science Fund (FWF), which is Austria's main funding organisation for basic research, encourages and helps all project leaders and project staff members to make their peer-reviewed research results freely available on the Internet. Since 1 January 2016, open access has been mandatory for all peer-reviewed publications listed in final reports on FWF-funded projects. Any exceptions must be clearly indicated and justified. For projects that started after 1 January 2015, open access has been compulsory for all peer-reviewed publications.</p> <p>All principal investigators in FWF-funded projects are obliged to submit a final report within three months of completing their projects. In 2017 all in all 608 final reports were submitted to the FWF, 42 out of them couldn't report publications by now.</p> <p>The publications and other data mentioned in those reports are archived and analysed by the FWF. This report examines the state of compliance with open access requirements on the basis of final project reports submitted in the year 2017.</p> <p>Main findings:</p> <ul> <li>A total of 8.398 publications were listed in the final project reports submitted in 2017.</li> <li>Of those publications, 6.439 were conclusively identified as peer-reviewed.</li> <li>Regarding compliance with the FWF's Open Access Policy, the report shows that 90% of the peer-reviewed publications that arose from submitted final reports of FWF projects in 2017 are openly accessible (2015: 83%, 2016: 92%).</li> <li>The most frequently chosen option is hybrid open access (41%). Since last year's report, the use of green open access has declined by 5% green open access and by 2 % gold open access. Other open access has increased by 4%, and hybrid open access by 1%.</li> <li>The majority of peer-reviewed publications submitted are journal articles, 91% of which are openly accessible.</li> <li>The lowest rate of compliance with the FWF's Open Access Policy can be found in editions, contributions to edited volumes and monographs (66%) an increase by 8% since last year's report.</li> <li>Although open access is not compulsory, 51% of non peer-reviewed publications are freely available through the internet.</li> <li>The absolute number of publications listed in final reports in 2017 includes 715 publications that are mentioned several times in different projects; however, those repetitions do not ultimately affect the relative share of open access publications (90%).</li> <li>56% of all peer-reviewed publications without open access originate from the "Special Research Programmes" (SFB). Since these reserach networks have a long duration, the open access policy of the FWF often does not yet apply to them.</li> </ul> <p><strong>II. Bias</strong></p> <p>All publications were entered in the FWF’s database manually and with the utmost care when the final project reports were received. Nevertheless, it is not possible to rule out minor errors entirely. Moreover, some systematic problems need to be solved in the future; the FWF is currently preparing to implement a research information system in which FWF-funded researchers will be able to enter and update their research data on an ongoing basis.</p> <ul> <li>Due to the amount of data involved, it was not possible to check the current open access status of all publications twice. The last check was performed in January 2018.</li> <li>In some cases, the embargo period may have expired after submission, and publications labelled "Other open access" in the FWF’s database may now be accessible through green open access.</li> </ul> <p>Whenever the status "peer-reviewed" could not be clearly identified according to FWF guidelines, the publications were classified as non peer-reviewed.</p>
Supporting Material of D2.1: Analysis of the OSTrails Interoperability Framework Tools Compliance
<p>This folder contains <span>the per-tool analyses, tool flashcards, master table, and tool onboarding document that support D2.1 findings.</span></p>
Replication Package for "Ensuring Open Source Integrity: The Intersection of Copy-Based Reuse and License Compliance"
<p>Replication Package for "Ensuring Open Source Integrity: The Intersection of Copy-Based Reuse and License Compliance"<br><br>Includes datasets, R and bash code.</p>
Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Open Access Compliance Monitoring 2020
<p><strong>I. Executive summary</strong></p> <p>The Austrian Science Fund (FWF), which is Austria's main funding organisation for basic research, encourages and helps all project leaders and project staff members to make their peer-reviewed research results freely available on the Internet. Any exceptions must be clearly indicated and justified. For projects that started after 1 January 2015, open access has been compulsory for all peer-reviewed publications. All principal investigators in FWF-funded projects are obliged to submit a final report within four months of completing their projects.</p> <p>In 2020, a total of 483 final reports were submitted to the FWF, 32 of which could not report any publications so far. The publications and other data mentioned in those reports are archived and analysed by the FWF. This report examines the state of compliance with open access requirements for peer-reviewed publications on the basis of final project reports submitted in the year 2020.</p> <p>2020 shows a significant decline in the number of publications compared to 2019. This decline can be explained by the fact that 15% fewer final project reports were received as a result of weaker funding years in the mid-2010s as well as an increased shift of final report submissions from 2020 to later points in time (‘corona effect’). Especially in the programmes with the highest number of publications (Doctoral Programmes, Special Research Programmes) as well as in programmes with many projects (Stand-Alone Projects, International Projects), there were fewer final project reports submitted, which has a massive impact on the total number of publications. It must be taken into account that the method (recording the number of publications via final project reports) is a look into the past, as the final project reports show publications that were produced in previous years during the project term. The publication activity in relation to the year of publication itself is relatively constant according to databases such as Dimensions. Due to the automation of the monitoring processes and the introduction of Plan S of cOAlition S, the category of ‘Other open access’ (self-archiving in a non-maintained repository, homepage, or archiving of preprints), which was previously determined manually, is no longer taken into account, and thus the open access share of peer-reviewed publications has decreased compared to previous years.</p> <p>Main findings:</p> <p>-A total of 6,196 publications were listed in the final project reports submitted in 2020.</p> <p>-Of those publications, 4,809 were conclusively identified as peer-reviewed.</p> <p>-Regarding compliance with the FWF's Open Access Policy, the analysis shows that 84% of the peer-reviewed publications listed in the final project reports submitted in 2020 were openly accessible (2015: 83%, 2016: 92%, 2017: 90%, 2018: 92%, 2019: 89%).</p> <p>-The most frequently chosen option was hybrid open access (40%). The share of old open access was 21%, the share of green open access 23%, and no open access 16%.</p> <p>-The majority of peer-reviewed publications submitted were journal articles (89%), 88% of which were openly accessible.</p> <p>-The lowest rate of compliance with the FWF's Open Access Policy could be found in editions, contributions to edited volumes, and monographs (38%).</p> <p>-The absolute number of publications listed in final reports in 2020 included 362 publications that were mentioned several times in different projects; however, those repetitions did not ultimately affect the relative share of open access publications (83%).</p> <p><strong>II. Bias</strong></p> <p>Most of the publications were submitted to the FWF via a research documentation system (provided by ©Researchfish), in which FWF-funded researchers are able to enter and update their research data on an ongoing basis. The last check of the open access status was performed in March 2020. In some cases, the embargo period may have already expired, and publications labelled ‘no open access’ in the FWF’s database may now be accessible through green open access.</p> <p>Whenever the status ‘peer-reviewed’ could not be clearly identified according to the FWF’s guidelines, the publications were classified as non-peer reviewed.</p> <p>Openly available non-peer reviewed publications were entered as 'openly available’.</p> <p> </p>
Dataset on non-compliance to ivermectin intake in the Bono Region of Ghana
<p>Dataset on survey on non-compliance to ivermectin intake in onchocerciasis-endemic communities in the Bono Region of Ghana</p>
STROBE checklist_Study of compliance to treatment advised to patients attending medicine OPD in a tertiary care ruraral hospital
<p>STROBE checklist of the study titled, "Study of compliance to treatment advised to patients attending medicine OPD in a tertiary care ruraral hospital."</p>
Compliance worksheet_Study of compliance to treatment advised to patients attending medicine OPD in a tertiary care rural hospital
<p>This is a worksheet of the data obtained from the questionnaires used for the study titled, "Study of compliance to treatment advised to patients attending medicine OPD in a tertiary care rural hospital."</p>
Wildlife as sentinels of compliance with law: an example with GPS-tagged scavengers and sanitary regulations
<p>Monitoring compliance with environmental laws is essential to overcoming possible implementation shortfalls jeopardizing their effectiveness. Besides improving our ecological understanding of wildlife, remote tracking technologies also allow us to take advantage of such ecological knowledge to use wildlife as sentinels of compliance with law.</p> <p>We illustrate this sentinel potential of wildlife using GPS-tracking of large scavengers with complementary functional traits (i.e., 21 griffon vultures and 13 wolves) to assess compliance with EU sanitary regulations allowing livestock carcass disposal in the field. Wildlife sentinels allowed the systematic evaluation of 489 livestock carcasses left in the field, which revealed an important mismatch between on-paper and in-reality implementation of these regulations. While <45 % of the carcasses were placed in authorized areas, compliance with all the criteria required by the regulations on livestock carcass disposal (e.g., from carcass characteristics such as species, age, or production system to its location far away from water, buildings, or roads) ranged from 0 to 4.2%, with no major differences between regions with uneven implementation. Major gaps in compliance pointed towards insufficient and over-bureaucratized designation of Scavenger Feeding Zones (SFZs), where livestock carcass disposal is authorized. The indiscriminate nature of distance criteria from carcasses to watercourses, buildings, and infrastructure further affected compliance.</p> <p>Synthesis and applications: GPS-tagged scavengers allow the on-ground monitoring of carcasses, the addressing of potential risks for wildlife, livestock, and human health, the quantitative assessment of compliance with the law and would improve estimates of carcass availability, substantially contributing to more effective legislation enforcement. Our results show the huge potential of GPS-tagged wildlife as sentinels for monitoring compliance to enhance the environmental rule of law.</p>
Impact of Physician Directed Education on Patient Compliance With Hepatitis C Therapy
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01405027. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Evaluation of Tailored Electronic Reminders on Compliance With Removable Orthodontic Retention
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03224481. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 2.
Patient Compliance With Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Administration
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03305081. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 9.
Effects of Mobility Devices on Nursing Compliance With Mobility Protocols
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01690910. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 9.
Outcomes of Compliance With Brace Wear in Clubfoot
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01481324. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 5.
Compliance With Antidepressant Medication in Treatment of Functional Dyspepsia
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01851863. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Supporting Smoke-Free Policy Compliance in Public Housing
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT05016505. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 105.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.