Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Peer Reviewing Data: experiences from a data journal

133 views

Published on

Invited presentation to the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers September 2016

Published in: Science
  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

Peer Reviewing Data: experiences from a data journal

  1. 1. Peer Reviewing Data: experiences from a data journal Varsha Khodiyar, PhD Data Curation Editor, Scientific Data 15.09.2016
  2. 2. 1 The data journal
  3. 3. 2 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Scientific Data, a Nature Research journal Data Descriptor Primary article type; sound science and facilitates data reuse Analysis New analyses or meta- analyses of existing data Article Original reports on advances in data sharing & reuse Comment Announcements of broad interest; usually invited www.nature.com/scientificdata
  4. 4. 3 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Under the hood of a Data Descriptor • Synthesis • Analysis • Conclusions • Context in which the data was generated (background) • How was the data generated? • How was the data processed? • Where is the data?
  5. 5. 4 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Data Descriptors have human and machine understandable components Human readable representation of study i.e. article (HTML & PDF) Human readable representation of study i.e. article (HTML & PDF)
  6. 6. 5 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Data Descriptors have human and machine understandable components Machine accessible representation of study i.e. metadata
  7. 7. 6 Guidance for authors
  8. 8. 7 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Templates and detailed guidance available online
  9. 9. 8 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Recommended repositories Browse our recommended data repositories online. • We currently list more than 80 repositories, across biological, medical, physical and social sciences • When required, we provide guidance to authors on the best place to store their data nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories
  10. 10. 9 The review process
  11. 11. 10 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Editorial office Susanna-Assunta Sansone Honorary Academic Editor Andrew L. Hufton Managing Editor Varsha K. Khodiyar Data Curation Editor
  12. 12. 11 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Selection of Editorial Board members Experts in their discipline AND Demonstrable experience of data standards, data reuse or data analysis in their discipline www.nature.com/sdata/about/editorial-board#eb
  13. 13. 12 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Data peer review www.nature.com/sdata/policies/for-referees Experimental Rigor and Technical Data Quality Were data produced in a sound manner? Technical quality of data – appropriate statistical analyses? Experimental rigor - appropriate depth, coverage? Completeness of the Description Sufficient detail to allow others to reproduce these steps? Sufficient detail to allow others to reuse this data? Consistent with relevant minimum reporting standards? Integrity of the Data Files and Repository Record Do data files appear complete and match manuscript descriptions? Are data archived to the most appropriate repository?
  14. 14. 13 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 We capture metadata about the dataset being described in each Data Descriptor. During the metadata curation process • Manuscript re-read • Data archive checked • Minor issues with the data and/or manuscript often identified Metadata curation and final data checking
  15. 15. 14 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Why a Data Descriptor may be rejected Reject without review • Out of scope or no data present Reject after review • Serious flaws in the study design, e.g. lack of crucial controls • Serious issues identified in the data files by the peer reviewers After rejection • Address concerns and resubmit to Scientific Data • Resubmit to another data journal • Withdraw data from Scientific Data integrated repositories Data should be technically reliable and suitable for use by others
  16. 16. 15 Summary
  17. 17. 16 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 Data peer review at Scientific Data Data Archive • Checked multiple times • Scientific reasoning underlying data reviewed by active researchers • Technical validity reviewed by discipline experts Data Citations • Citation accuracy confirmed by specialist editor • Citation format checked by editorial team • Data linkage tested by production team Data peer review does not have to be onerous Reviewing data can save overall reviewing time
  18. 18. 17 Nature Research PowerPoint presentation title / 00.00.2016 17 Thank you Visit nature.com/scientificdata Email scientificdata@nature.com Tweet @ScientificData

×