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.
8,537
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
8,537 results for “Openness”
Open trade data
<p>Trade-related datasets with a CC-BY or more permissive license</p>
Data supplement to: "Refractory depression - Mechanisms & Efficacy of Radically Open Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (RefraMED): findings of randomised trial on benefits and harms"
<p>Data and code to support primary analyses reported in "Refractory depression – mechanisms and efficacy of radically open dialectical behaviour therapy (RefraMED): findings of a randomised trial on benefits and harms". British Journal of Psychiatry. doi: 10.1192/bjp.2019.53</p>
Open access data for 2-year percutaneous osseointegrated implants - A sheep model
<p>Percutaneous osseointegrated <strong>(OI)</strong> devices for amputees are metallic endoprostheses, surgically implanted into the residual bone that protrude through the skin, allowing attachment of an exoprosthetic. In contrast to standard socket-type systems, these percutaneous OI devices can provide an improved prosthetics attachment platform. However, bone adaptations, which include atrophy and/or hypertrophy along the extent of the host bone-endoprosthetic interface, are known clinical outcomes and are dependent upon the load transfer region of the device to the host bone. The goal of this study was to determine if a percutaneous OI device, designed with a porous coated distal region and a collar, could promote and maintain stable bone attachment. A total of eight, 18 to 24-month old, mixed-breed sheep were surgically implanted with a percutaneous OI device. For 24-months, animals were allowed to bear weight as tolerated and monitored for signs of bone remodelling. At necropsy, the endoprosthesis and the surrounding tissues were harvested, radiographically imaged, and histomorphometrically analyzed to determine the periprosthetic bone adaptation in five animals. Bone growth into the porous coating was achieved in all five animals. Serial radiographic data showed stress-shielding related bone adaptation based on the placement of the endoprosthetic stem. When collar placement achieved end-bearing against the transected bone, distal bone conservation/hypertrophy was observed. The results supported the use of distally porous coated percutaneous OI devices for distal load-transfer and host bone maintenance.</p>
Open Access Finding Tools Study Sample
<p>We used five tools - Google Scholar, Lazy Scholar, Open Access Button, Unpaywall, and Kopernio - to search for open access versions of 1,000 articles to see how successful each one was. This dataset shows our results. See the ReadMe file for more detail.</p>
Quality and Success in Open Source Software: A Systematic Mapping
<p>Reference_List.pdf includes all of the articles that is related with the study, "Quality and Success in Open Source Software: A Systematic Mapping".</p> <p>Reference_List2.pdf includes one part of Reference_List (37 articles) and all of the articles that included in the study, "A Review on the Relation of Quality and Success in Open Source Software".</p>
The adoption of Article Processing Charges as a business model by Brazilian Open Access journals
<p>These are the raw data behind the publication:</p> <p>Appel, A.L.; Albagli, S. The adoption of Article Processing Charges as a business model by Brazilian Open Access journals. <em>Transinformação</em>, 31:e180045, 2019. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889201931e180045">https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889201931e180045</a></p> <p>Different funding and business model alternatives for Open Access to scientific publication have been discussed and tried, either by Gold open access journals or by the ‘hybrid’ ones. A growing number of both types of scholarly journals have adopted a publication fee – more specifically an Article Processing Charge – as their open access business model, a procedure that has been the subject of controversies. The objective of this study is to characterize Brazilian open access journals that adopt article processing charges. The main contribution of this study is to audit and support decision making of editorial policies and business models for open access that are being proposed by and for Brazilian journals. We defined a sample of Brazilian open access journals using article processing charges extracted from the Directory of Open Access Journals database in April 2018 along with their classification in the Scimago Journal Ranking, Journal Citation Reports and Qualis Capes system, considered as an indicator of prestige of academic journals. The study reveals that a small number of Brazilian open access journals are currently applying article processing charges, with practices varying mainly according to fields of study, types of organization and classification according to the Qualis system.</p>
Tracking Open Access Policy Compliance
<p>This dataset, which was created by merging data from CrossRef, CORE, and Mendeley, contains metadata for over 800 thousand publications published between 2013 and 2018. The dataset was used to study how much time does it take for authors to deposit their articles in Open Access repositories in relation to when these articles were published. The source codes of our analysis are available at https://github.com/oacore/jcdl_2019.</p>
Wings: 68, Loew system for wing cells (Mydas lividus Curran); 69, Comstock Needham system for wing veins tNernomouiae pantherinus Gerstaecker); 70, Apiophora paulseni Philippi, a: open 2nd submarginal cell; b: reduced size of axillary lobe; 71., Mitrodetus sp.; 72 Pseudonomoneura sp. in The American Genera of Mydidae (Diptera), with the Description of three new Genera and two new Species
Wings: 68, Loew system for wing cells (Mydas lividus Curran); 69, Comstock Needham system for wing veins tNernomouiae pantherinus Gerstaecker); 70, Apiophora paulseni Philippi, a: open 2nd submarginal cell; b: reduced size of axillary lobe; 71., Mitrodetus sp.; 72 Pseudonomoneura sp.
Opening of the 10th European Summer University in Digital Humanities "Culture & Technology"
<p>Welcoming by the Vice-Rector for Research and Young Scholars of the University of Leipzig, Prof. Dr. Erich Schröger.</p> <p>Handing over of the certificates to scholarship, fellowship and bursary winners by Elisabeth Burr et al.</p> <p>Introduction into the programme and philosophy of the European Summer University in Digital Humanities "Culture & Technology" by Elisabeth Burr</p>
LIBER 2019 Workshop. Open Access books in academic libraries – how can we adapt workflows and cost management to an open scholarly communications landscape?
<p>This dataset includes all the results from a workshop held at the LIBER Annual Conference 2019 on June 26, 2019, in Dublin, Ireland. The workshop aimed at collecting and discussing current library practices related to open access books.</p> <p>The dataset includes information from a survey made in preparation for the conference, where 67 European libraries responded to a questionnaire based on activities or workflows in libraries related to open access books. Both the survey questionnaire and the results from the survey are uploaded as separate files.</p> <p>The dataset also includes the presentation made by keynote speaker Eelco Ferwerda from the OAPEN Foundation. He presented results based on the 2017 landscape study report on open access monographs with some new results from more recent studies by Springer Nature and a follow-up report by Knowledge Exchange.</p> <p>Olaf Siegert from ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics presented a brief overview of what libraries can do to promote OA books in terms of collection management, publication services and development of staff and organisation. The conclusion is that it is not necessarily big changes that are needed.</p> <p>Sofie Wennström presented results from a survey aimed at European research libraries on behalf of the LIBER Open Access Working Group. The survey reveals that many libraries are already working with processes to promote OA books. This is done by libraries organising publishing services or inhouse publishing, by including OA books in discovery services and repositories and by supporting authors to learn more about open access and open licensing.</p> <p>Finally, the LIBER Open Access Working Group shares a report from the workshop providing some quick takeaways and some good examples brought up during the breakout session with the workshop participants.</p>
CERN Open Hardware Survey 2017
<p>Data + notebook for the "CERN Open Hardware Survey" of 2017.</p>
Source data belonging to "Visualisation of dCas9 target search in vivo using an open-microscopy framework"
<p>Source data corresponding to "Visualisation of dCas9 target search <em>in vivo</em> using an open-microscopy framework". Contains pTarget and pNonTarget raw datasets, as well as all localization data, cell UV intensity data, cell outline data, and analysed diffusion coefficient lists.</p>
Open Research Data in Medicine - Polish scientists' attitudes towards data sharing
<p>The survey on the attitudes and beliefs of research staff has been carried out at selected Polish medical universities. The purpose of the questionnaire was to collect respondents' opinions on opening research data created during their scientific work. The research was aimed at preparing the necessary educational, technical and legal support for scientists after launching the Polish Medical Platform, when Polish scientists will be asked to deposit their data in local repositories.</p>
EXPLANATION OF PLATE I Left lateral aspect of skull of Stephanosaurus marginatus; one- fifth the natural size. Abbreviations.-D, lateral temporal fossa; DN, dentary; J, jugal; L, lachrymal; MX, maxilla; N, nasal; NO, nasal opening; OR, orbit; PD, predentary; PF, prefrontal; PM, premaxilla; Q, quadrate; QJ, quadrato-jugal; S, squamosal; SA, surangular. in On a new genus and species of carnivorous dinosaur from the Belly River Formation of Alberta, with a description of the skull of Stephanosaurus marginatus from the same horizon
EXPLANATION OF PLATE I Left lateral aspect of skull of Stephanosaurus marginatus; one- fifth the natural size. Abbreviations.-D, lateral temporal fossa; DN, dentary; J, jugal; L, lachrymal; MX, maxilla; N, nasal; NO, nasal opening; OR, orbit; PD, predentary; PF, prefrontal; PM, premaxilla; Q, quadrate; QJ, quadrato-jugal; S, squamosal; SA, surangular.
Map of articles about "Teaching Open Science"
<p>This description is part of the blog post "Systematic Literature Review of teaching Open Science" https://sozmethode.hypotheses.org/839</p> <p>According to my opinion, we do not pay enough attention to teaching Open Science in higher education. Therefore, I designed a seminar to teach students the practices of Open Science by doing qualitative research.About this seminar, I wrote the article ”<a href="https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/b3zf7">Teaching Open Science and qualitative methods</a>“. For the article ”Teaching Open Science and qualitative methods“, I started to review the literature on ”Teaching Open Science“. The result of my literature review is that certain aspects of Open Science are used for teaching. However, Open Science with all its aspects (Open Access, Open Data, Open Methodology, Open Science Evaluation and Open Science Tools) is not an issue in publications about teaching.</p> <p>Based on this insight, I have started a systematic literature review. I realized quickly that I need help to analyse and interpret the articles and to evaluate my preliminary findings. Especially different disciplinary cultures of teaching different aspects of Open Science are challenging, as I myself, as a social scientist, do not have enough insight to be able to interpret the results correctly. Therefore, I would like to invite you to participate in this research project!</p> <p>I am now looking for people who would like to join a collaborative process to further explore and write the systematic literature review on “Teaching Open Science“. Because I want to turn this project into a Massive Open Online Paper (MOOP). According to the <a href="https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/b3zf7">10 rules of Tennant et al (2019) on MOOPs</a>, it is crucial to find a core group that is enthusiastic about the topic. Therefore, I am looking for people who are interested in creating the structure of the paper and writing the paper together with me. I am also looking for people who want to search for and review literature or evaluate the literature I have already found. Together with the interested persons I would then define, the rules for the project (cf. Tennant et al. 2019). So if you are interested to contribute to the further search for articles and / or to enhance the interpretation and writing of results, please get in touch. For everyone interested to contribute, the list of articles collected so far is freely accessible at Zotero: <a href="https://www.zotero.org/groups/2359061/teaching_open_science">https://www.zotero.org/groups/2359061/teaching_open_science</a>. The figure shown below provides a first overview of my ongoing work. I created the figure with the free software <a href="https://www.yworks.com/products/yed">yEd</a> and uploaded the file to zenodo, so everyone can download and work with it:</p> <p>To make transparent what I have done so far, I will first introduce what a systematic literature review is. Secondly, I describe the decisions I made to start with the systematic literature review. Third, I present the preliminary results.</p> <p><strong>Systematic literature review – an Introduction </strong></p> <p>Systematic literature reviews “are a method of mapping out areas of uncertainty, and identifying where little or no relevant research has been done.” (Petticrew/Roberts 2008: 2). Fink defines the systematic literature review as a “systemic, explicit, and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars, and practitioners.” (Fink 2019: 6). The aim of a systematic literature reviews is to surpass the subjectivity of a researchers’ search for literature. However, there can never be an objective selection of articles. This is because the researcher has for example already made a preselection by deciding about search strings, for example “Teaching Open Science”. In this respect, transparency is the core criteria for a high-quality review. </p> <p>In order to achieve high quality and transparency, Fink (2019: 6-7) proposes the following seven steps:</p> <ol> <li>Selecting a research question.</li> <li>Selecting the bibliographic database.</li> <li>Choosing the search terms.</li> <li>Applying practical screening criteria.</li> <li>Applying methodological screening criteria.</li> <li>Doing the review.</li> <li>Synthesizing the results.</li> </ol> <p>I have adapted these steps for the “Teaching Open Science” systematic literature review. In the following, I will present the decisions I have made.</p> <p><strong>Systematic literature review – decisions I made</strong></p> <ol> <li><strong>Research question</strong>: I am interested in the following research questions: How is Open Science taught in higher education? Is Open Science taught in its full range with all aspects like Open Access, Open Data, Open Methodology, Open Science Evaluation and Open Science Tools? Which aspects are taught? Are there disciplinary differences as to which aspects are taught and, if so, why are there such differences?</li> <li><strong>Databases</strong>: I started my search at the <a href="https://doaj.org/">Directory of Open Science (DOAJ)</a>. “DOAJ is a community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer-reviewed journals.” (https://doaj.org/) Secondly, I used the <a href="http://base-search.net">Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (base)</a>. Base is operated by Bielefeld University Library and “one of the world’s most voluminous search engines especially for academic web resources” (base-search.net). Both platforms are non-commercial and focus on Open Access publications and thus differ from the commercial publication databases, such as Web of Science and Scopus. For this project, I deliberately decided against commercial providers and the restriction of search in indexed journals. Thus, because my explicit aim was to find articles that are open in the context of Open Science.</li> <li><strong>Search terms</strong>: To identify articles about teaching Open Science I used the following search strings: “teaching open science” OR teaching “open science” OR teach „open science“. The topic search looked for the search strings in title, abstract and keywords of articles. Since these are very narrow search terms, I decided to broaden the method. I searched in the reference lists of all articles that appear from this search for further relevant literature. Using Google Scholar I checked which other authors cited the articles in the sample. If the so checked articles met my methodological criteria, I included them in the sample and looked through the reference lists and citations at Google Scholar. This process has not yet been completed.</li> <li><strong>Practical screening criteria</strong>: I have included English and German articles in the sample, as I speak these languages (articles in other languages are very welcome, if there are people who can interpret them!). In the sample only journal articles, articles in edited volumes, working papers and conference papers from proceedings were included. I checked whether the journals were predatory journals – such articles were not included. I did not include blogposts, books or articles from newspapers. I only included articles that fulltexts are accessible via my institution (University of Kassel). As a result, recently published articles at Elsevier could not be included because of the special situation in Germany regarding the Project DEAL (https://www.projekt-deal.de/about-deal/). For articles that are not freely accessible, I have checked whether there is an accessible version in a repository or whether preprint is available. If this was not the case, the article was not included. I started the analysis in May 2019.</li> <li><strong>Methodological criteria</strong>: The method described above to check the reference lists has the problem of subjectivity. Therefore, I hope that other people will be interested in this project and evaluate my decisions. I have used the following criteria as the basis for my decisions: First, the articles must focus on teaching. For example, this means that articles must describe how a course was designed and carried out. Second, at least one aspect of Open Science has to be addressed. The aspects can be very diverse (FOSS, repositories, wiki, data management, etc.) but have to comply with the principles of openness. This means, for example, I included an article when it deals with the use of FOSS in class and addresses the aspects of openness of FOSS. I did not include articles when the authors describe the use of a particular free and open source software for teaching but did not address the principles of openness or re-use.</li> <li><strong>Doing the review</strong>: Due to the methodical approach of going through the reference lists, it is possible to create a map of how the articles relate to each other. This results in thematic clusters and connections between clusters. The starting point for the map were four articles (Cook et al. 2018; Marsden, Thompson, and Plonsky 2017; Petras et al. 2015; Toelch and Ostwald 2018) that I found using the databases and criteria described above. I used yEd to generate the network. „<strong>yEd</strong> is a powerful desktop application that can be used to quickly and effectively generate high-quality diagrams.” (<a href="https://www.yworks.com/products/yed">https://www.yworks.com/products/yed</a>) In the network, arrows show, which articles are cited in an article and which articles are cited by others as well. In addition, I made an initial rough classification of the content using colours. This classification is based on the contents mentioned in the articles’ title and abstract. This rough content classification requires a more exact, i.e., content-based subdivision and evaluation by others, who are experts in the respective fields/disciplines.</li> </ol>
Dataset - A Review on Blockchain Technology and Blockchain Projects Fostering Open Science
<p>Dataset for publication (A Review on Blockchain Technology and Blockchain Projects Fostering Open Science) in "Frontiers in Blockchain" Journal: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fbloc.2019.00016/.</p>
6TiSCH Open Data Action Datasets
<p>This repository contains the datasets of the 6TiSCH Open Data Action experiment of Fed4FIRE. The datasets cover the execution of three application-level test scenarios, building-automation, home-automation and industrial-monitoring, on two testbeds, w-iLab.t in Ghent and OpenTestbed in Paris. The reference firmware image used was OpenWSN. The data format is documented at https://benchmark.6tis.ch/.</p>
A Refined Open State of the Glycine Receptor Obtained Via Molecular Dynamics Simulations
<p>Representative simulation trajectory and coordinate files (starting coordinates a representative structure) from the work which first appeared on bioRxiv:</p> <p>A Refined Open State of the Glycine Receptor Obtained Via Molecular Dynamics Simulations</p> <p>Marc A. Dämgen, Philip C. Biggin</p> <p>bioRxiv 668830; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/668830</p>
Tutorial Weather Data Cutouts for PyPSA-Eur: An Open Optimisation Model of the European Transmission System
<p><strong>PyPSA-Eur</strong> is an open model dataset of the European power system at the transmission network level that covers the full ENTSO-E area. It can be built using the code provided at <a href="https://github.com/PyPSA/PyPSA-eur">https://github.com/PyPSA/PyPSA-eur</a>.</p> <p><strong>It contains</strong> alternating current lines at and above 220 kV voltage level and all high voltage direct current lines, substations, an open database of conventional power plants, time series for electrical demand and variable renewable generator availability, and geographic potentials for the expansion of wind and solar power.</p> <p><strong>Not all data dependencies</strong> are shipped with the <a href="https://github.com/PyPSA/PyPSA-eur">code repository</a>, since git is not suited for handling large changing files. Instead we provide separate <strong>data bundles and cutouts</strong> to be downloaded and extracted as noted in the <a href="https://pypsa-eur.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installation.html">documentation</a>.</p> <p>The provided lightweight <strong>cutouts </strong>are spatiotemporal subsets of the German weather data from the <a href="https://software.ecmwf.int/wiki/display/CKB/ERA5+data+documentation">ECMWF ERA5</a> reanalysis dataset for March 2013 to be used for the <a href="https://pypsa-eur.readthedocs.io/en/latest/tutorial.html">PyPSA-Eur tutorial</a>. They have been prepared by and are for use with the <a href="https://github.com/PyPSA/atlite">atlite</a> tool (<a href="https://atlite.readthedocs.io/">https://atlite.readthedocs.io/</a>).</p> <p><strong>ECMWF ERA5</strong></p> <ul> <li><strong>Source: </strong><a href="https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/cdsapp#!/dataset/reanalysis-era5-single-levels?tab=overview">https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/cdsapp#!/dataset/reanalysis-era5-single-levels?tab=overview</a></li> <li><strong>Terms of Use: </strong><a href="https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/api/v2/terms/static/20180314_Copernicus_License_V1.1.pdf">https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/api/v2/terms/static/20180314_Copernicus_License_V1.1.pdf</a></li> </ul>
Most popular scholarly works in the English Wikipedia and their transition to open access
<p>Following the release of "The future of OA" by Piwowar, Priem, Orr (2019), interest has grown on how to accelerate the share of scholarly works consultations which meet an open access record.</p> <p>Based on download patterns for over 23 million DOIs in 2017, released by Elbakyan (2018), we found that the 1 million most downloaded DOIs accounted for over 30 % of the total downloads. Of these 1 million DOIs, over 50 thousands (5 %) were previously identified as cited on the English Wikipedia and not open access (Leva 2018). Of these, 2440 DOIs are now open access according to the Unpaywall API as of 2019-10-25: a list of the corresponding OA URL and host type is enclosed, showing that 34 % became OA at the publisher while 66 % were made OA by a repository. The newly OA works were hosted at over 400 domains of which over 300 repositories, but the top 10 repositories accounted for a large portion of the works, with the top 3 repositories accounting for over 40 % of the newly found green open access DOIs.</p> <p>Part of the newly OA works were just false negatives in Unpaywall in 2018, but a small manual sample shows that most are truly new deposits. Works from 2017 can be expected to be over-represented in the sample given that they were probably the most popular downloads of 2017 and could have been under embargo in 2018 when the previous measure of open access status was made.</p>
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.