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.
3,561
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
3,561 results for “Safety Assessment”
Mobile Service Robots Crash Testing with Pedestrians: Safety Assessment with Child and Adult Dummies
<p>Data published with the manuscript: “<em>Estimating risks posed by personal mobility devices and service robots to pedestrians: comparative crash testing of adult versus child dummies</em>”. 2021 (Paez-Granados & Billard, 2021)<br> <strong>Summary:</strong></p> <p>This dataset contains injury measures during collisions between a mobile service robot - Qolo - (Paez-Granados, et al, 2018) and pedestrian dummies: male adult Hybrid-III (H3) and child model 3-years-old (Q3). We present multiple collision scenarios for the assessment of pedestrian safety, considering possible impacts at the legs for adult pedestrians, and legs, chest and head for children. In these tests, we followed known methods of safety analysis used in car crash testing and used a standing wheelchair robot "Qolo" as a representative system of mobile service robots, such as delivery bots (robot without occupant), person carrier robots, autonomous wheelchairs, standing mobility vehicles, and other transport robots expected to operate in pedestrian and public areas.</p> <p>The robot was equipped with an experimental front structure allowing different bumper heights and measurement of reaction forces. On the other hand, the human dummies were equipped with standard instrumentation calibrated in accordance with SAE J211-1 for impact tests, thus, the child dummy, Q3 provided head accelerations, neck forces and moments, chest deflections, and accelerations; and pelvis accelerations. The dummy H3 provided forces and moments at the tibia and femur, and accelerations at the pelvis, chest, and head. You will find scripts to read and plot the data, as well as, analysis of the injury risk based on standard crash testing metrics: Head Injury Criteria (HIC-15), head acceleration (a_3ms), Neck Injury (Nij), Chest deflection (CD), and tibia injury (TI).</p> <p><strong>Instructions: </strong></p> <p><em>This dataset contains the following main files:</em></p> <ol> <li><strong><em>Data Description.pdf</em>: </strong>Highly recommended to read through this file for understanding the setup of the collected dataset, as well as, the submitted manuscript.</li> <li><em><strong>collision_test_rawdata.zip</strong>: </em>This file contains all the raw data for each sensor as mentioned in table 3, organized in independent subfolders as described in table 2.<em> ‘test_name’/01_values/’testName’_CFC1000.xlsx</em></li> <li><em><strong>collision_test_analysis.zip</strong>: </em>This file contains all the processed data for each sensor in order to apply known injury metrics (Nij, HIC15, acc_3ms, TI, CC, VCI), organized in independent subfolders as described in table 2.<em>‘test_name’/01_values/’testName’_Analysis_v2.xlsx --> </em>Dataset with filtered sensor data accordingly to SAEJ21.</li> <li><em><strong>collision_data_matlab_structure.zip</strong>:</em><em> Matlab containers with all data - also available as .mat files for easy reading from Code Ocean capsule.</em></li> <li><em><em><strong>scripts-crash-test-service-robots.zip</strong>:</em> processing of the dataset is provided in this file with structure of data in Matlab containers and scripts for visualizing the data (see section III), further analysis scripts in the linked GitHub: <a href="https://github.com/epfl-lasa/crash-tests-service-robots">https://github.com/epfl-lasa/crash-tests-service-robots</a></em></li> </ol>
Maximum temperature data from thermal safety assessment of type 21700 lithium-ion batteries with NMC, NCA and LFP cathodes by means of Accelerating Rate Calorimetry (ARC)
<p>Data of safety investigation and thermal abuse behavior of commercial type 21700 LIB cells is provided.</p> <p>It has been acquired with Accelerating Rate Calorimetry (ARC), using a Thermal Hazard Technology type ES ARC.</p> <p>Moreover, thermal abuse was done by means of the so-called Heat-Wait-Seek (HWS) test, at different states of charge (SOC) from 0 to 100.</p> <p>Different cathode chemistries are compared (NMC, NCA and LFP), as well as for NCA chemistry, the high energy (HE) and high power (HP) cell design.</p> <p>For each cell, data includes the maximum temperature measured during thermal abuse at the surface on the center of the cell. Additionally, the mean value and standard deviation for each cell type and state of charge is provided.</p> <p>This data is supporting this article in the journal Batteries:</p> <p><a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9050237">https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9050237</a></p> <p>Additional supporting material to this article are the exothermal data for thermal abuse, that are published here:</p> <p><a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7707929">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7707929</a></p> <p> </p>
Updated list of QPS-recommended microorganisms for safety risk assessments carried out by EFSA
<p>The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) asked the Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) to deliver a scientific Opinion on the maintenance of the list of qualified presumption of safety (QPS) biological agents. The QPS approach was developed by the EFSA Scientific Committee to provide a harmonised generic pre-evaluation to support safety risk assessments of biological agents intentionally introduced into the food and feed chain, in support of the concerned scientific Panels and Units in the frame of market authorisations.</p> <p>The taxonomic identity, body of knowledge, the safety concerns in relation to pathogenicity and virulence, and the safety for the environment of those microbiological agents are assessed. Safety concerns identified for a respective taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible and reasonable in number, reflected as ‘qualifications’ that are assessed at the strain level by the EFSA’s scientific Panels.</p> <p>The<strong> “list of microorganisms with QPS status”</strong> first established in 2007, has been revised and updated annually until 2014 via <strong>QPS</strong> <strong>Opinions</strong>; since 2014 the updates are carried out and published every 3 years. If new information is retrieved from extended literature searches (ELS) that would change the QPS status of a TU or its qualifications, this is also published in the Panel Statement covering the previous 6-months period. The <strong>ELS </strong><strong>protocol</strong> can be found at <a href="https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fzenodo.org%2Fdoi%2F10.5281%2Fzenodo.3607188&data=05%7C02%7C%7Ca719c81b95134433fddc08dc112814e1%7C406a174be31548bdaa0acdaddc44250b%7C1%7C0%7C638404111040390688%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=FaY3tbLnn%2BB%2BDu3PrtEzJR0zPa14z%2FpoKWUBBOaHk34%3D&reserved=0">https://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.3607188</a> and the <strong>Search</strong><strong> strategies</strong> are available at: <a href="https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.5281%2Fzenodo.3607193&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ca3e4d3a851c84defc2a008d7aa44f9e5%7C406a174be31548bdaa0acdaddc44250b%7C1%7C0%7C637165085527347066&sdata=tCzKMQLR2I%2BZBr%2F0sOXPDoPitdjQyqKdlVqDqwigA%2Bo%3D&reserved=0">https://doi.org/</a><a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3607192">10.5281/zenodo.3607192</a>.</p> <p> </p> <p>The <strong>QPS Panel Statement</strong> also includes the evaluation of microbiological agents notified to EFSA within the 6-month period for an assessment for feed additives, food enzymes, food additives and flavourings, and novel foods or plant protection products for a possible QPS status. The new QPS status recommendations are incorporated into the 2022 updated<strong> “list of microorganisms with QPS status</strong>” is available in this upload. The list of “<strong>Microbi</strong><strong>ological agents </strong><strong>as notified to EFSA</strong><strong>”</strong> from 2007, in the context of technical dossiers to EFSA Units, for intentional use in feed and/or food or as sources of food and feed additives, enzymes and plant protection products (PPPs) for safety assessment can be found at <a href="https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.5281%2Fzenodo.3607184&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ca3e4d3a851c84defc2a008d7aa44f9e5%7C406a174be31548bdaa0acdaddc44250b%7C1%7C0%7C637165085527357024&sdata=%2Fe7qiRXiuKQi%2FBvK5S%2F7undYHv7ibxBlLEHPcSlRz24%3D&reserved=0">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.</a><a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3607183">3607183</a>.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Useful links on EFSA QPS</strong></p> <p>EFSA topic on QPS: <a href="https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.efsa.europa.eu%2Fen%2Ftopics%2Ftopic%2Fqualified-presumption-safety-qps&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ca3e4d3a851c84defc2a008d7aa44f9e5%7C406a174be31548bdaa0acdaddc44250b%7C1%7C0%7C637165085527366985&sdata=TlcglouTWhBY24K5ApAoawNpADKgyl%2FefxVUEbxjQo0%3D&reserved=0">https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/qualified-presumption-safety-qps</a></p> <p>Link to the virtual issue on QPS on Wiley Online Library: <a href="https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fefsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com%2Fdoi%2Ftoc%2F10.1002%2F(ISSN)1831-4732.QPS&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7f88eba744034d83233b08d7a8cd3c1c%7C406a174be31548bdaa0acdaddc44250b%7C1%7C0%7C637163471731831002&sdata=AiprIUek%2B%2But46VabBGk0IMIgLR98CDmxoINYPkKBbs%3D&reserved=0">https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/toc/10.1002/(ISSN)1831-4732.QPS</a></p> <p><strong>Versions history:</strong></p> <p>Versions 1 and 2 were substituted by version 3 – all are associated with the QPS Panel statement EFSA 7: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2017: <a href="https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5131">https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5131</a> </p> <p>Version 4 is associated with the QPS Panel statement EFSA 8: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until March 2018: <a href="https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5315">https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5315</a> </p> <p>Versions 5 and 6 were substituted by version 7 – all are associated with the QPS Panel statement EFSA 9: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2018: <a href="https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5555">https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5555</a> </p> <p>Version 8 is associated with the QPS Panel statement EFSA 10: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until March 2019: <a href="https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5753">https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5753</a> </p> <p>Version 9 is associated with the QPS Panel statement EFSA 11: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2019: <a href="https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5965">https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5965</a> and with the Scientific Opinion on the update of the list of QPS-recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA (2017-2019): <a href="https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5966">https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5966</a> </p> <p>Version 10: updates version 9 following the update of the qualification of <em>Bacillus velezensis</em> as: ‘absence of toxigenic potential and absence of aminoglycoside production ability’ - applied in the QPS Statement part 11 (ON-5965) and in the 2019 Scientific Opinion (ON-5966).</p> <p>Version 11: updates version 10 following the addition of the <em>Bacillus circulans</em> ‘for production purposes only’ - applied in the QPS Statement part 13 (ON-6377) and in the 2019 Scientific Opinion (ON-5966).</p> <p>Version 12 updates version 11 following the addition of the <em>Bacillus paralicheniformis</em><strong> </strong>with the qualifications 'absence of toxigenic activity’ and ‘absence of genetic information to synthesize bacitracin';<strong> </strong>and adding <em>Schizochytrium limacinum</em>, which is a synomym for <em>Aurantiochytrium</em> <em>limacinum,</em> - applied in the QPS Statement part 14 (ON-6689)<strong> </strong>and in the 2019 Scientific Opinion (ON-5966).</p> <p>Version 13 updates version 12 following the addition of <em>Haematococcus lacustris</em> synonym <em>Haematococcus pluvialis</em>, recommended for QPS status with the qualification ‘for production purposes only’. Some other changes related to taxonomy and qualifications are described in the QPS Statement part 15 (ON-7045)<strong>.</strong></p> <p>Version 14, update of version 13, is related to QPS Statement part 16 (ON-7408)<strong>.</strong></p> <p>Version 15 is related to QPS Statement part 17 (ON-7746)<strong>.</strong></p> <p>Version 16 is related to QPS Statement part 18 (ON-8092)<strong>.</strong></p> <p>Version 17 is related to QPS Statement part 19 (ON-8517)<strong>.</strong></p> <p>Version 18 is also related to QPS Statement part 19 (ON-8517) with a small correction<strong>.</strong></p> <p>Version 19 and 20 are related to QPS Statement part 20 (ON-8882).</p> <p>Version 21 is related to QPS Statement part 21 (ON-9169)</p> <p>Version 22 is related to QPS Statement part 22 (ON-9510)</p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Note: </strong>As of January 2022 the updated list is provided only as excel file format.</p>
Self-Assessed Radiation Safety Culture Across Sectors
<p>The aim of this work is to compare radiation safety culture in the medical and nuclear sectors, by means of a radiation protection self-assessment tool.</p> <p>This is a programme level assessment, considering the department’s culture to the extent that it exhibits the traits of a healthy safety culture described by the US Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO)<sup>1</sup>. It draws on the levels of radiation safety self-assessment described in Report 162 of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP)<sup>2</sup>.</p> <p>The tool consists of fifteen good practice statements, against which users assess themselves on a five point scale. Each statement is accompanied by prompt questions, to provide evidence for the choice of response.</p> <p>The purpose of the self-assessment tool is to assist employers in taking ownership of radiation protection by recognising the common management tools and processes that apply across departments and modalities. It is also expected to aid recognition of the elements of day-to-day working that contribute to an organisation’s culture and how these express the importance of radiation safety.</p> <p>Data will be presented demonstrating how perceived safety culture varies both within and between sectors, and suggestions made as to how this approach could contribute to improving safety culture in the UK.</p> <p>The work is in keeping with the new ICRP general recommendations in that it incorporates aspects of communications and stakeholder engagement, set out in the overarching considerations in section 3 of the draft report.</p>
Evaluation of the shucking of certain species of scallops contaminated with domoic acid with a view to the production of edible parts meeting the safety requirements foreseen in the Union legislation - Summary statistics on occurrence and consumption data and exposure assessment results
<p>DomoicAcid_Raw_Occurrence_Data.CSV contains the raw occurrence dataset on Domoic Acid contaminant in scallops as extracted from EFSA DWH on the 9 June 2020, 16,369 samples presented in the opinion as described in its section 1.3.2. Occurrence data submitted to EFSA. The data is provided in .csv format. This dataset is compliant with EFSA SSD model and contains two additional columns documenting issues identified in the cleaning process (column: issue) and the action taken (column: outcome) to address the issue (e.g. delete record or update values in specific fields).</p> <p>The link to the catalogues of controlled terminologies can be found under "Related identifiers”.</p> <p><strong>Annex_</strong> DomoicAcid</p> <p>Table of contents</p> <p><br> Table A1</p> <p>Description of FoodEx2 codes used to describe scallop species and their anatomical parts</p> <p>Table A2</p> <p>Data cleaning steps applied to occurrence data on domoic acid in scallops</p> <p>Table A3</p> <p>Percentage of Left-Censored data and descriptive statistics for Limits of detection (LODs) and Limits of quantification (LOQs) for domoic acid in scallops (mg/kg)</p> <p>Table A4</p> <p>Descriptive statistics for domoic acid in scallops (mg/kg) as reported in the cleaned database (statistics weighted by number of units per sample)</p> <p>Table A5</p> <p>Descriptive statistics of body tissue weights (g) of scallops as submitted by data providers</p>
A Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Ruxolitinib Cream in Children With Atopic Dermatitis (TRuE-AD3)
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04921969. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 2. Publications: 0.
Study to Assess the Safety and Immunogenicity of a Single Dose of a Quadrivalent Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine (MenACYW Conjugate Vaccine) in Older Adults in Turkey and Lebanon
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03869866. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 2. Publications: 1.
A Clinical Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Gene Therapy for the Treatment of Cerebral Adrenoleukodystrophy (CALD)
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03852498. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 6. Publications: 1.
Study Comparing Short Term Efficacy of Dysport and Dysport NG to Placebo, and to Assess Efficacy and Safety of Dysport NG of Subjects With Cervical Dystonia
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01261611. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 11. Publications: 1.
A Global Study to Assess the Drug Dynamics, Efficacy, and Safety of Venglustat (GZ/SAR402671) in Parkinson's Disease Patients Carrying a Glucocerebrosidase (GBA) Gene Mutation
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT02906020. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 16. Publications: 3.
Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Midostaurin (PKC412) in Combination With Standard Chemotherapy During Induction and Consolidation Followed by 12 Months of Maintenance Monotherapy in Patient
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03379727. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 15. Publications: 1.
Pivotal Study to Assess the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Dupilumab in Patients With Moderate-to-severe COPD With Type 2 Inflammation
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03930732. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 24. Publications: 5.
Basket Study to Assess Efficacy, Safety and PK of Iptacopan (LNP023) in Autoimmune Benign Hematological Disorders
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT05086744. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 6. Publications: 1.
Assess Bronchodilator Effect and Safety of Two Doses of QVM149 Compared to a Fixed Dose Combination of Salmeterol/Fluticasone in Patients With Asthma.
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03063086. IPD Sharing: UNDECIDED. Countries: 6. Publications: 1.
A Phase 3 Study to Assess Efficacy and Safety of Tafasitamab Plus Lenalidomide and Rituximab Compared to Placebo Plus Lenalidomide and Rituximab in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory (R/R) Follicular L
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04680052. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 28. Publications: 1.
Study Assessed the Safety and Efficacy of Eltrombopag in Chinese Refractory or Relapsed Severe Aplastic Anemia (SAA) Subjects.
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03988608. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Study to Assess Efficacy and Safety of Cx601, Adult Allogeneic Expanded Adipose-derived Stem Cells (eASC) for the Treatment of Complex Perianal Fistula(s) in Participants With Crohn's Disease (CD)
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03279081. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 15. Publications: 0.
Study Assessing the Efficacy and Safety of Alpelisib Plus Fulvestrant in Men and Postmenopausal Women With Advanced Breast Cancer Which Progressed on or After Aromatase Inhibitor Treatment.
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT02437318. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 31. Publications: 6.
Global Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of Edoxaban (DU-176b) vs Standard Practice of Dosing With Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT00781391. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 46. Publications: 35.
A Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of BIVV009 (Sutimlimab) in Participants With Primary Cold Agglutinin Disease Without A Recent History of Blood Transfusion
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03347422. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 14. Publications: 2.
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.