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
Report . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Report . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
addClaim

October 2021 DCS Reviews: Summary Report

Authors: Parton, Graham A;

October 2021 DCS Reviews: Summary Report

Abstract

A report from the 2021 metadata quality review undertaken for discovery level records produced by the NERC data centres. This includes a comparison of the results from this round of metadata checks with previous rounds which revealed that despite a doubling of metadata records for the EDS as a whole since the previous review round in 2016, metadata quality was maintained at a high standard. Having adapted the review process slightly from the 2016 round it was possible to isolate data centre records coming from collections of similarly templated records. Consequently, this review was able to give further insight as to the breakdown of record quality by record type. From this the strength of taking templating approaches to metadata record creation was demonstrated with resulting records being of higher quality overall, though there are some variance in results still. Additionally, non-geographic datasets were examined for the first time as an identifiable class of records within the sample, which showed a slightly lower than average scores - but again with a large spread of metadata quality scores.

Keywords

Metadata, Metadata/standards

  • 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