This page is intended to capture information related to NDS-211 - Getting issue details... STATUS .
Related
Approved and Recommended Repositories
Publishers, funding agencies, research/domain organizations, and libraries often provide lists of recommended or supported repositories for depositing research data. The motivations and requirements are often different, but the lists themselves might serve as the basis for our requirements analysis. We can review these (and other) lists to determine the factors in recommending data repositories to researchers.
NIH:
Elsevier:
Nature
PLOS
Libraries
Other
- http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/viewFile/9.1.152/349
- http://www.rdc-drc.ca/wp-content/uploads/Review-of-Research-Data-Repositories-2015.pdf
- AMS: https://www.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/publications/authors/journal-and-bams-authors/journal-and-bams-authors-guide/data-archiving-and-citation/
- AGU: http://publications.agu.org/files/2014/06/Data-Repositories.pdf
- http://openarchaeologydata.metajnl.com/about/#repo
SEAD C3PR/Matchmaker
The SEAD Matchmaker is used to pair datasets to repositories. It was originally part of the SEAD Virtual Archive, which enabled automatic depositing of data into institutional repositories via OAIS Submission Information Packages (SIP). The matchmaker is now part of the SEAD 2.0 C3PR service (https://github.com/Data-to-Insight-Center/sead2/tree/master/sead-matchmaker). Repositories can register with C3PR, providing information including accepted data types, maximum collection depth, maximum dataset size, minimum metadata fields, affiliations, and global identifier requirements. These are to some extent technical requirements.
See also:
Registries of Research Data Repositories
Researcher identifiers
- ORCID: Persistent digital identifier for researchers – might be helpful in collecting researcher profile information for recommendation. ORCID doesn't appear to have a field.
Analysis
Reviewing the above lists and registries, we can identify factors in the recommendation of repositories to researchers:
Factor | Description |
---|---|
Funding agency approval | Funding agencies (e.g. NIH) have lists of approved repositories |
Researcher communities | Some repositories restrict to researchers in certain communities |
Publisher integration | Publishers (e.g., Elsevier) have arrangements with repositories (e.g., bi-directional linking) |
Domain | Repositories are often restricted by domain, with some generalist services |
Technical restrictions | Size |
Community mandates | Some research communities have mandated repositories (see Nature list) |
Data type | Some repositories are restricted to specific types of data. These criteria vary, for example:
Data types are often directly related to domain/field of study. |
Metadata format | Some repositories are restricted to specific types of metadata (e.g., MIAME) |
Use cases