Re: [rda-covid19][rda-covid19-epidemiology] rda-covid19-epidemiology rds general - Work organization - Issues / Shortcomings

21 Apr 2020

I was hoping we might come up with a set of tags that are of value particularly when it comes to COVID-19 dataset search. As part of DDI and CODATA we have been working with the Google Dataset Search folks. Perhaps we could enter into a discussion with them on Google Dataset Search filters.
In any event, if you decide to go in the direction Carsten is proposing, I would be happy to participate.
Jay Greenfield, Ph.D.
Data Documentation Initiative
CODATA Representative
UNECE ModernStats Representative
- Show quoted text -From: ***@***.*** <***@***.***> on behalf of coschmidt via RDA-COVID19 <***@***.***>
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 10:25 AM
To: ***@***.*** <***@***.***>; ***@***.*** <***@***.***>
Subject: [rda-covid19][rda-covid19-epidemiology] rda-covid19-epidemiology rds general - Work organization - Issues / Shortcomings
Dear Claire, dear all,
it is great to see all the enthusiasm aroud the cooperation on improving COVID-19 related research.
A lot of wonderful work and expertise is organized within RDA.
Participating in the Epi group I would like to point to some challenges I currently perceive.
Beforehand, as I do not take part in all discussions, sorry if some of this has been mentioned elsewhere or if I did overlook something!
My concerns are mainly related to some lack of guidance on the documents and overviews to be created.
* Zotero: The list contains many valuable links and I was able to identify important ressources. Thanks! Yet:
* Content is often entered in an unstructured way, somtimes detailed, sometimes superfically. This undermines the FAIRness of our entries.
* For example, the search functionality works well if appropriate key terms are used. Example: "COVID19 data" is repeatedly used as the main description. This not really a lot of information depth. Appropriate search terms would allow for better content search not only within but across WGs.
* -> Couldn't we better agree on standardized ways of anotating content and curate it accordingly? [Side-remark: We encourage the world to adhere more to standards, what about ourselves.]
* Documents: Sometimes I see a very generic approach to documents
* Example: "Good practices for Research Software" -> Is such a document our goal as many have thought and published about this topic. This scope is not specific to any single group here or COVID-19. Would we succeed in creating something better in a few days? I am not certain!
* Woudln't it rather be the task to think about specific requirements in the COVID-19 pandemia for some specific aspect of research software.
* Some documents have a very broad scope as the one example above or "Standard Harmonised Electronic Epidemic data collection" -Should one document really target a broad scope of goals?
* -> If we want to move fast I think very specific short documents on clearly defined specific issues of immediate COVID-19 relevance within the particular work areas might be better to handle, given existing time constraints. They might be put together later.
* If it is a non-specific topic, it might not be a good idea to handle it wthin a single WG to avoid double activities.
This is just my humble take, I hope I do not offend anyone with my remarks.
Carsten Oliver Schmidt
Prof. Dr. rer. med. habil. Dr. phil.
Universitätsmedizin Greifswald
Institut für Community Medicine
SHIP-KEF - Division Quality in the Health Scienes
Walther Rathenau Str. 48
17475 Greifswald
Tel.: 03834 867713
Fax: 03834 866684
Email: ***@***.***