Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Other ORP type . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Other ORP type . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Other ORP type . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Templates for FAIRness evaluation criteria - RDA-SHARC ig V1.4

Authors: DAVID, Romain; Mabile, Laurence; Specht, Alison; Stryeck, Sarah; Mohamed, Yahia; Thomsen, Mogens; Daniele, Bailo; +13 Authors

Templates for FAIRness evaluation criteria - RDA-SHARC ig V1.4

Abstract

In order to foster data sharing, the RDA-SHARC (SHAring Rewards & Credit) interest group has been set up to unpack and improve crediting and rewarding mechanisms in the data/resources sharing process. As part of the objectives, Two assessment grids have been developed using criteria to establish if data are compliant to the F.A.I.R principles (findable /accessible / interoperable / reusable). The criteria used are based on the work from FORCE 11*, and on the basis of the Open Science Career Assessment Matrix designed by the EC Working group on Rewards under Open science. This complete template displays the criteria that must be applied by researchers to attest to their FAIR practice. Criteria are organized in 5 clusters: ‘Sharing motivations’; ‘Findable’, ‘Accessible’, ‘Interoperable’ and ‘Reusable’. For each criterion, 4 choices are proposed (‘Never / Not Assessable’; ‘Mandatory’; ‘Sometimes’; ‘Always’). ‘Mandatory’ is selected if researchers know how to apply the criterion but only do so if they are mandated to; ‘Sometimes’ is selected when stakeholders know that FAIR compliance is important, but that the criterion is not applied every time; ‘Always’ is the case of an optimal organisation (as infrastructure design or as community consensus) and quality processes are maintained for long term compliance. At least one choice but one only should be selected per criteria. Evaluation needs to be done for each cluster F/A/I/R; The final evaluation will be the sum of [number of each ticked degree] / [total number of appliable criteria] in each cluster; the ‘sharing motivations’ should be appreciated qualitatively in the final interpretation. The level of compliance for each criterion can be used in a final report to prioritise the most appropriate and sufficient training, support and actions. 

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average