Supplementary data need to be kept in public repositories.

Nature (Impact Factor: 42.35). 01/2006; 438(7069):738. DOI: 10.1038/438738a
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Peer Reviewed

Download full-text


Available from: Judith A Blake, Jul 03, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An open access copy of this article is available and complies with the copyright holder/publisher conditions. Despite policies and calls for scientists to make data available, this is not happening for most environmental- and biodiversity-related data because scientists' concerns about these efforts have not been answered and initiatives to motivate scientists to comply have been inadequate. Many of the issues regarding data availability can be addressed if the principles of “publication” rather than “sharing” are applied. However, online data publication systems also need to develop mechanisms for data citation and indices of data access comparable to those for citation systems in print journals.
    BioScience 05/2009; 59(5). DOI:10.1525/bio.2009.59.5.9 · 5.44 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Providing for long-term and consistent public access to scientific data is a growing concern in biomedical research. One aspect of this problem can be demonstrated by evaluating the persistence of supplementary data associated with published biomedical papers. We manually evaluated 655 supplementary data links extracted from PubMed abstracts published 1998-2005 (Method 1) as well as a further focused subset of 162 full-text manuscripts published within three representative high-impact biomedical journals between September and December 2004 (Method 2). For Method 1 we found that since 2001, only 71 - 92% of supplementary data were still accessible via the links provided, with 93% of these inaccessible links occurring where supplementary data was not stored with the publishing journal. Of the manuscripts evaluated in Method 2, we found that only 83% of these links were available approximately a year after publication, with 55% of these inaccessible links were at locations outside the journal of publication. We conclude that if supplemental data is required to support the publication, journals policies must take-on the responsibility to accept and store such data or require that it be maintained with a credible independent institution or under the terms of a strategic data storage plan specified by the authors. We further recommend that publishers provide automated systems to ensure that supplementary links remain persistent, and that granting bodies such as the NIH develop policies and funding mechanisms to maintain long-term persistent access to these data.
    BMC Bioinformatics 02/2006; 7:260. DOI:10.1186/1471-2105-7-260 · 2.67 Impact Factor