Sharing Publication-Related Data and Materials Responsibilities of Authorship in the Life Sciences (2003) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1. Study Overview and Background
1. Study Overview and Background
Pages 17-26
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 17... ...
Another paper on a draft version of the human genome, assembled by the publicly funded International Human Genome Sequence Consortium, was published at the same time in Nature and the sequence data deposited in GenBank, an annotated collection of ad publicly available DNA sequences. Although Science usually requires authors to deposit DNA sequences that a paper cites in GenBank or one of the affiliated public databases, in this case it allowed Celera to post its sequence data on the company's own Web site, where they were made available to academic researchers, but with restrictions on the amount of data downloadable from the Web site at any one time.
|
From page 18... ...
· Uncertainty as to whether academic investigators should be treated differently from industry investigators with regard to the provision of access to their publication-related data or materials. To address these concerns, the National Research Council created, in October 2001, the Committee on Responsibilities of Authorship in the Biological Sciences, whose members were chosen from academe and the commercial sector for their expertise in the life sciences
|
From page 19... ...
The study will examine requirements imposed on authors by journals, identify common practices in the community, and explore whether a single set of accepted standards for sharing exists. The study will also explore whether more appropriate standards should be developed, including what principles should underlie them and what rationale there might be for aDowing exceptions to them.
|
From page 20... ...
As emphasized at the workshop by committee chair Thomas Cech, president of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the purpose of the workshop was to address "the responsibility of authors with respect to sharing publication-related data and materials." While the principles and standards identified in this report have broad applicability to various disciplines within the life sciences, the committee did not conduct a comprehensive examination of practices for sharing of data and materials specific to every discipline. Such practices are tailored to the types of data and material in use and by the unique circumstances of the research.
|
From page 21... ...
Although the focus of this report is on the life sciences, the principles and standards considered in the committee's deliberations are of a fundamental nature, and the committee hopes that its recommendations will be of interest to scientists in general.
|
From page 22... ...
Although scientists who work for the companies typically want to share reagents and information and many companies see value in sharing, the primary responsibility of a company is to its investors. Giving away valuable data and materials without securing some type of intellectual property protection, and without any promise of financial return, can, depending on costs and competitive implications, result in reluctance to share widely.
|
From page 23... ...
The Bayh-Dole Act encourages universities and other not-for-profit research institutions to promote the use, commercialization, and public availability of inventions developed through federally funded research by allowing them to own the rights to patents they obtain on these inventions. That has contributed to more overlap in the interests of the for-profit and not-for-profit research sectors, and in some cases impeded the unrestricted sharing of publication-related data and material as universities and other not-for-profit research institutions have sought the commercial development of and economic returns from their intellectual property (see Box 1-1~.
|
From page 24... ...
The geneticists surveyed by Campbell and his colleagues cited additional reasons for intentionally withholding information, data, or materials related to their own published research. They include the financial cost of providing the materials or information to others; the need to preserve patient confidentiality; the need to protect the ability of a graduate student, postdoctoral fellow, or junior faculty member to publish foDow-up papers; the need to protect one's own ability to publish follow-up papers; and the likelihood that the recipient will never reciprocate.
|
From page 25... ...
And some have argued that mandatory sharing of source code prevents universities from exercising their legal right to develop commercial products from federally funded research. In the workshop's keynote presentation, Eric Lander, director of the Whitehead Institute Center for Genome Research, reviewed some of the many contentions that are shaping the debate over sharing of data and materials associated with publications and the related topic of publicdomain resources.
|
From page 26... ...
. Box 3-2 On Access to Published Genome Sequences Under the terms of the public-access agreement that allows academic researchers to use Celera's human genome sequence (Venter et al., 2001)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.