Quantifying the use of bioresources for promoting their sharing in scientific research

GigaScience

Anne Cambon-Thomsen^1,11  Markus Pasterk⁵  Maria Angeles Muñoz-Fernàndez^1,12  Francine Kauffmann¹  Paul Hofman^1,10  Jennifer R Harris⁹  Pierre Antoine Gourraud⁸  Mirella Filocamo²  Elena Bravo^1,14  Jane Carpenter^1,13  Robert Hewitt⁷  Mylène Deschênes⁶  Gudmundur A Thorisson⁴  Raymond Dalgleish³  Laurence Mabile^1,11 

[1] UMR1018 INSERM-Université Paris Sud, 16 avenue Paul Vaillant Couturier, Villejuif Cedex, 94807, France;Istituto G. Gaslini, Lab Diagnosi Pre-Postnatale Malattie Metaboliche, L.go G. Gaslini, Genoa, 16147, Italy;Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK;Faculty of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Iceland, Sturlugata 7, Reykjavik, 101, Iceland;International Prevention Research Institute, 95 Cours Lafayette, Lyon, 69006, France;P3G, 2155 Guy Street Montreal, Quebec, H3H 2R9, Canada;European, African & Middle Eastern Society for Biopreservation and Biobanking, 20 Boulevard du Roi René, Aix-en-Provence, 13100, France;Department of Neurology, Mission Bay campus, University of California, 675 Nelson Rising Lane, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA;The Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Division of Epidemiology, PO Box 4404, Oslo, Nydalen, N-0403, Norway;“Cancéropôle PACA Biobank”, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Pasteur, 30 Avenue de la Voie Romaine, Nice, 06000, France;UMR1027 INSERM-Université de Toulouse III-Paul Sabatier, 118 Route de Narbonne, Toulouse Cedex 9, 31062, France;HIV HGM Spanish Biobank, C/Dr. Esquerdo, Madrid, 46.28007, Spain;Breast Cancer Tissue Bank, University of Sydney, Darcy Road Westmead, Sydney, NSW 2145, Australia;Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Department of Cellular Biology and Neuroscience, 299 Viale Regina Elena, Rome, 00161, Italy

关键词: Open data;    Science policy;    Biology;    Impact factor;    Traceability;    Metrics;    Identifier;    Biobank;    Bioresource;    Data sharing;   

Others  :  861632
DOI  :  10.1186/2047-217X-2-7

 received in 2013-01-17, accepted in 2013-04-12,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

An increasing portion of biomedical research relies on the use of biobanks and databases. Sharing of such resources is essential for optimizing knowledge production. A major obstacle for sharing bioresources is the lack of recognition for the efforts involved in establishing, maintaining and sharing them, due to, in particular, the absence of adequate tools. Increasing demands on biobanks and databases to improve access should be complemented with efforts of end-users to recognize and acknowledge these resources. An appropriate set of tools must be developed and implemented to measure this impact.

To address this issue we propose to measure the use in research of such bioresources as a value of their impact, leading to create an indicator: Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF). Key elements to be assessed are: defining obstacles to sharing samples and data, choosing adequate identifier for bioresources, identifying and weighing parameters to be considered in the metrics, analyzing the role of journal guidelines and policies for resource citing and referencing, assessing policies for resource access and sharing and their influence on bioresource use. This work allows us to propose a framework and foundations for the operational development of BRIF that still requires input from stakeholders within the biomedical community.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Mabile et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Yu Y, Zhu Z: Significance of biological resources collection and tumour tissue bank creation. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2010, 2:5-8.
• [2]Kaye J: From single biobanks to international networks: developing e-governance. Hum Genet 2011, 130:377-382.
• [3]Walport M, Brest P: Sharing research data to improve public health. Lancet 2011, 377:537-539.
• [4]Altshuler JS, Balogh E, Barker AD, Eck SL, Friend SH, Ginsburg GS, Herbst RS, Nass SJ, Streeter CM, Wagner JA: Opening up to precompetitive collaboration. Sci Transl Med 2010, 2:52cm26.
• [5]The Wellcome Trust - Sharing research data to improve public health: joint statement of purpose. http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/publichealthdata webcite
• [6]Knoppers BM, Harris JR, Tasse AM, Budin-Ljosne I, Kaye J, Deschenes M, Zawati MH: Towards a data sharing Code of Conduct for international genomic research. Genome Med 2011, 3:46. BioMed Central Full Text
• [7]Sherry ST, Ward MH, Kholodov M, Baker J, Phan L, Smigielski EM, Sirotkin K: dbSNP: the NCBI database of genetic variation. Nucleic Acids Res 2001, 29:308-311.
• [8]Kaye J, Heeney C, Hawkins N, De Vries J, Boddington P: Data sharing in genomics—re-shaping scientific practice. Nat Rev Genet 2009, 10:331-335.
• [9]Editorial: The scientific social network. Nat Med 2011, 17:137.
• [10]Alsheikh-Ali AA, Qureshi W, Al-Mallah MH, Ioannidis JPA: Public Availability of Published Research Data in High-Impact Journals. PLoS One 2011, 6:e24357.
• [11]Savage CJ, Vickers AJ: Empirical Study of Data Sharing by Authors Publishing in PLoS Journals. PLoS One 2009, 4:e7078.
• [12]Kaye J: Building a foundation for biobanking: the, 2009 OECD guidelines on human biobanks and genetic research databases (HBGRDs). Eur J Health Law 2010, 2010(17):187-190.
• [13]Cambon-Thomsen A: Assessing the impact of biobanks. Nat Genet 2003, 34:25-26.
• [14]Cambon-Thomsen A: The social and ethical issues of post-genomic human biobanks. Nat Rev Genet 2004, 5:866-873.
• [15]Cambon-Thomsen A, Thorisson GA, Mabile L: The role of a bioresource research impact factor as an incentive to share human bioresources. Nat Genet 2011, 43:503-504.
• [16]The Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF) working group. http://www.gen2phen.org/groups/brif-bio-resource-impact-factor webcite
• [17]Garfield E: The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA 2006, 295:90-93.
• [18]Paskin N: E-citations: actionable identifiers and scholarly referencing. Learned Publishing 2000, 13:159-166.
• [19]Kauffmann F, Cambon-Thomsen A: Tracing biological collections - Between books and clinical trials. JAMA 2008, 299:2316-2318.
• [20]DataCite. http://www.datacite.org webcite
• [21]CrossRef. http://www.crossref.org/ webcite
• [22]Digital Object Identifier (DOI). http://www.doi.org/ webcite
• [23]Vadakkeparambil S: DOIs and ISRCTN records – Improving permanency of clinical research. http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2012/12/19/dois-and-isrctn-records-improving-permanency-of-clinical-research/ webcite
• [24]Thorisson GA: Accreditation and attribution in data sharing. Nat Biotechnol 2009, 27:984-985.
• [25]Fenner M: Some thoughts on principles for scientific attribution. http://blogs.plos.org/mfenner/2010/10/28/some-thoughts-on-principles-for-scientific-attribution/ webcite
• [26]Open Researcher & Contributor ID ORCID. http://orcid.org webcite
• [27]Fenner M: ORCID: unique identifiers for authors and contributors. Info Standards Quaterly 2011, 23:10-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.3789/isqv23n3.2011.03 webcite
• [28]International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). http://www.icmje.org webcite
• [29]Joly Y, Zeps N, Knoppers BM: Genomic databases access agreements: legal validity and possible sanctions. Hum Genet 2011, 130:441-449.
• [30]BioSharing. http://biosharing.org/ webcite
• [31]Legal protection: databases - Europa. http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/internal_market/businesses/intellectual_property/l26028_en.htm webcite
• [32]Eagle-i. https://www.eagle-i.net/ webcite
• [33]BioSHaRE. http://www.bioshare.eu/ webcite
• [34]P3G. http://p3g.org/ webcite
• [35]Biobanques. http://www.crbfrance.fr/ webcite
• [36]Peterson J, Campbell J: Marker papers and data citation. Nat Genet 2010, 42:919.