But survey suggests data-sharing is widely seen as ‘way forward’ despite lacklustre preprint performance
Covid-19 may not spark the revolution in data-sharing that advocates of increased openness have predicted, researchers surveying preprint papers have suggested.
Julien Larrègue, a sociologist at the University of Copenhagen, and his colleagues examined thousands of preprints—papers published ahead of peer-review—on Covid-19 and other topics. They found that those on the coronavirus published between January and November 2020 showed “similar levels of data openness” to articles published on other topics, with only a minority of authors in either category sharing their data.
Their work appears to refute a common view in publishing that a focus on open access publications to speed up dissemination of medical knowledge during the pandemic would tilt the scales toward ‘open’ research.
“The results are rather disappointing…this finding indicates—contrary to what many have suggested—that a global pandemic is not sufficient to radically modify scientific practices,” wrote Larrègue and his colleagues in a 30 November article on the London School of Economics blog.
They found that although scientists working on Covid-19 “do declare slightly higher rates of data availability…the proportion of manuscripts concerned remains very low”, at 11.2 per cent.
Here to stay?
But the findings may not shake the views of many in research who believe that open data is here to stay.
In a recent survey of more than 4,500 researchers conducted by the online digital repository for academic research, Figshare, half of respondents said they saw lockdown as “extremely” or “somewhat” likely to result in the reuse of open data provided by other labs. Some 65 per cent expected to reuse their own data and 55 per cent of respondents felt that sharing data should be a part of the requirements in awarding grants.
The results, published on 1 December in Figshare’s annual report on the state of open data, also showed that more than a third of researchers expected to see more collaboration as a result of Covid-19.
The effect was especially pronounced in countries including Brazil and India, where roughly half of respondents expected collaboration to increase.
But the study, published in collaboration with the group Digital Science and publisher Springer Nature, also revealed gaps in researchers’ knowledge on open access, as well as lingering concerns. Twenty nine per cent of respondents did not know who would cover the cost of making their research data open. A mere 13 per cent of respondents felt that researchers get enough credit for sharing data, and 59 per cent thought they received too little credit.
But despite these hurdles, many funders and research organisations are pressing ahead in support of open access initiatives.
On 5 November, the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association announced a new independent body called the Open Access Switchboard. The body will serve as a “central information exchange hub, connecting parties and systems, streamlining communication and the neutral exchange of OA-related, publication-level information, and ensuring a financial settlement” in open access transition deals, OASPA said.
The initiative has the backing of several large research funders, including UK Research and Innovation, the Wellcome Trust, and the US-based Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
A version of this article also appeared in Research Europe