In 2020, according to respondents surveyed, data masters typically leverage a variety of external data sources to enhance their insights. The most popular external data sources for data masters being publicly available competitor data, open data, and proprietary datasets from data aggregators, with **, **, and ** percent, respectively.

Algeria DZ: SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data was reported at 45.958 NA in 2022. This records a decrease from the previous number of 49.075 NA for 2021. Algeria DZ: SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data is updated yearly, averaging 49.892 NA from Dec 2016 (Median) to 2022, with 7 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 52.417 NA in 2018 and a record low of 45.958 NA in 2022. Algeria DZ: SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Algeria – Table DZ.World Bank.WDI: Governance: Policy and Institutions. The data sources overall score is a composity measure of whether countries have data available from the following sources: Censuses and surveys, administrative data, geospatial data, and private sector/citizen generated data. The data sources (input) pillar is segmented by four types of sources generated by (i) the statistical office (censuses and surveys), and sources accessed from elsewhere such as (ii) administrative data, (iii) geospatial data, and (iv) private sector data and citizen generated data. The appropriate balance between these source types will vary depending on a country’s institutional setting and the maturity of its statistical system. High scores should reflect the extent to which the sources being utilized enable the necessary statistical indicators to be generated. For example, a low score on environment statistics (in the data production pillar) may reflect a lack of use of (and low score for) geospatial data (in the data sources pillar). This type of linkage is inherent in the data cycle approach and can help highlight areas for investment required if country needs are to be met.;Statistical Performance Indicators, The World Bank (https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/statistical-performance-indicators);Weighted average;

PredictLeads Job Openings Data provides high-quality hiring insights sourced directly from company websites - not job boards. Using advanced web scraping technology, our dataset offers real-time access to job trends, salaries, and skills demand, making it a valuable resource for B2B sales, recruiting, investment analysis, and competitive intelligence.

Key Features:

✅232M+ Job Postings Tracked – Data sourced from 92 Million company websites worldwide. ✅7,1M+ Active Job Openings – Updated in real-time to reflect hiring demand. ✅Salary & Compensation Insights – Extract salary ranges, contract types, and job seniority levels. ✅Technology & Skill Tracking – Identify emerging tech trends and industry demands. ✅Company Data Enrichment – Link job postings to employer domains, firmographics, and growth signals. ✅Web Scraping Precision – Directly sourced from employer websites for unmatched accuracy.

Primary Attributes:

• id (string, UUID) – Unique identifier for the job posting.
• type (string, constant: "job_opening") – Object type.
• title (string) – Job title.
• description (string) – Full job description, extracted from the job listing.
• url (string, URL) – Direct link to the job posting.
• first_seen_at – Timestamp when the job was first detected.
• last_seen_at – Timestamp when the job was last detected.
• last_processed_at – Timestamp when the job data was last processed.

Job Metadata:

• contract_types (array of strings) – Type of employment (e.g., "full time", "part time", "contract").
• categories (array of strings) – Job categories (e.g., "engineering", "marketing").
• seniority (string) – Seniority level of the job (e.g., "manager", "non_manager").
• status (string) – Job status (e.g., "open", "closed").
• language (string) – Language of the job posting.
• location (string) – Full location details as listed in the job description.
• Location Data (location_data) (array of objects)
• city (string, nullable) – City where the job is located.
• state (string, nullable) – State or region of the job location.
• zip_code (string, nullable) – Postal/ZIP code.
• country (string, nullable) – Country where the job is located.
• region (string, nullable) – Broader geographical region.
• continent (string, nullable) – Continent name.
• fuzzy_match (boolean) – Indicates whether the location was inferred.

Salary Data (salary_data)

• salary (string) – Salary range extracted from the job listing.
• salary_low (float, nullable) – Minimum salary in original currency.
• salary_high (float, nullable) – Maximum salary in original currency.
• salary_currency (string, nullable) – Currency of the salary (e.g., "USD", "EUR").
• salary_low_usd (float, nullable) – Converted minimum salary in USD.
• salary_high_usd (float, nullable) – Converted maximum salary in USD.
• salary_time_unit (string, nullable) – Time unit for the salary (e.g., "year", "month", "hour").

Occupational Data (onet_data) (object, nullable)

• code (string, nullable) – ONET occupation code.
• family (string, nullable) – Broad occupational family (e.g., "Computer and Mathematical").
• occupation_name (string, nullable) – Official ONET occupation title.

Additional Attributes:

• tags (array of strings, nullable) – Extracted skills and keywords (e.g., "Python", "JavaScript").

📌 Trusted by enterprises, recruiters, and investors for high-precision job market insights.

PredictLeads Dataset: https://docs.predictleads.com/v3/guide/job_openings_dataset

from bs4 import BeautifulSoup import requests

  Fetch the webpage

url = 'https://example.com' response = requests.get(url) html_content = response.text

  Parse the HTML content

soup = BeautifulSoup(html_content, 'html.parser')

  Extract all the links

for link in soup.find_all('a'): print(link.get('href'))

This report compares specific health conditions, overall health, and health care utilization prevalence estimates from the 2006 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) and other national data sources. Methodological differences among these data sources that may contribute to differences in estimates are described. In addition to NSDUH, three of the data sources use respondent self-reports to measure health characteristics and service utilization: the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), and the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). One survey, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), conducts initial interviews in respondents\' homes, collecting further data at nearby locations. Five data sources provide health care utilization data extracted from hospital records; these sources include the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS), the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS), the National Health and Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS), and the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN). Several methodological differences that could cause differences in estimates are discussed, including type and mode of data collection; weighting and representativeness of the sample; question placement, wording, and format; and use of proxy reporting for adolescents.

Maximum Analysis Sample Sizes by Analysis Type and Data Source.

This dataset contains metadata (title, abstract, date of publication, field, etc) for around 1 million academic articles. Each record contains additional information on the country of study and whether the article makes use of data. Machine learning tools were used to classify the country of study and data use.

Our data source of academic articles is the Semantic Scholar Open Research Corpus (S2ORC) (Lo et al. 2020). The corpus contains more than 130 million English language academic papers across multiple disciplines. The papers included in the Semantic Scholar corpus are gathered directly from publishers, from open archives such as arXiv or PubMed, and crawled from the internet.

We placed some restrictions on the articles to make them usable and relevant for our purposes. First, only articles with an abstract and parsed PDF or latex file are included in the analysis. The full text of the abstract is necessary to classify the country of study and whether the article uses data. The parsed PDF and latex file are important for extracting important information like the date of publication and field of study. This restriction eliminated a large number of articles in the original corpus. Around 30 million articles remain after keeping only articles with a parsable (i.e., suitable for digital processing) PDF, and around 26% of those 30 million are eliminated when removing articles without an abstract. Second, only articles from the year 2000 to 2020 were considered. This restriction eliminated an additional 9% of the remaining articles. Finally, articles from the following fields of study were excluded, as we aim to focus on fields that are likely to use data produced by countries’ national statistical system: Biology, Chemistry, Engineering, Physics, Materials Science, Environmental Science, Geology, History, Philosophy, Math, Computer Science, and Art. Fields that are included are: Economics, Political Science, Business, Sociology, Medicine, and Psychology. This third restriction eliminated around 34% of the remaining articles. From an initial corpus of 136 million articles, this resulted in a final corpus of around 10 million articles.

Due to the intensive computer resources required, a set of 1,037,748 articles were randomly selected from the 10 million articles in our restricted corpus as a convenience sample.

The empirical approach employed in this project utilizes text mining with Natural Language Processing (NLP). The goal of NLP is to extract structured information from raw, unstructured text. In this project, NLP is used to extract the country of study and whether the paper makes use of data. We will discuss each of these in turn.

To determine the country or countries of study in each academic article, two approaches are employed based on information found in the title, abstract, or topic fields. The first approach uses regular expression searches based on the presence of ISO3166 country names. A defined set of country names is compiled, and the presence of these names is checked in the relevant fields. This approach is transparent, widely used in social science research, and easily extended to other languages. However, there is a potential for exclusion errors if a country’s name is spelled non-standardly.

The second approach is based on Named Entity Recognition (NER), which uses machine learning to identify objects from text, utilizing the spaCy Python library. The Named Entity Recognition algorithm splits text into named entities, and NER is used in this project to identify countries of study in the academic articles. SpaCy supports multiple languages and has been trained on multiple spellings of countries, overcoming some of the limitations of the regular expression approach. If a country is identified by either the regular expression search or NER, it is linked to the article. Note that one article can be linked to more than one country.

The second task is to classify whether the paper uses data. A supervised machine learning approach is employed, where 3500 publications were first randomly selected and manually labeled by human raters using the Mechanical Turk service (Paszke et al. 2019).[1] To make sure the human raters had a similar and appropriate definition of data in mind, they were given the following instructions before seeing their first paper:

Each of these documents is an academic article. The goal of this study is to measure whether a specific academic article is using data and from which country the data came.

There are two classification tasks in this exercise:

1. identifying whether an academic article is using data from any country

2. Identifying from which country that data came.

For task 1, we are looking specifically at the use of data. Data is any information that has been collected, observed, generated or created to produce research findings. As an example, a study that reports findings or analysis using a survey data, uses data. Some clues to indicate that a study does use data includes whether a survey or census is described, a statistical model estimated, or a table or means or summary statistics is reported.

After an article is classified as using data, please note the type of data used. The options are population or business census, survey data, administrative data, geospatial data, private sector data, and other data. If no data is used, then mark "Not applicable". In cases where multiple data types are used, please click multiple options.[2]

For task 2, we are looking at the country or countries that are studied in the article. In some cases, no country may be applicable. For instance, if the research is theoretical and has no specific country application. In some cases, the research article may involve multiple countries. In these cases, select all countries that are discussed in the paper.

We expect between 10 and 35 percent of all articles to use data.

The median amount of time that a worker spent on an article, measured as the time between when the article was accepted to be classified by the worker and when the classification was submitted was 25.4 minutes. If human raters were exclusively used rather than machine learning tools, then the corpus of 1,037,748 articles examined in this study would take around 50 years of human work time to review at a cost of $3,113,244, which assumes a cost of $3 per article as was paid to MTurk workers.

A model is next trained on the 3,500 labelled articles. We use a distilled version of the BERT (bidirectional Encoder Representations for transformers) model to encode raw text into a numeric format suitable for predictions (Devlin et al. (2018)). BERT is pre-trained on a large corpus comprising the Toronto Book Corpus and Wikipedia. The distilled version (DistilBERT) is a compressed model that is 60% the size of BERT and retains 97% of the language understanding capabilities and is 60% faster (Sanh, Debut, Chaumond, Wolf 2019). We use PyTorch to produce a model to classify articles based on the labeled data. Of the 3,500 articles that were hand coded by the MTurk workers, 900 are fed to the machine learning model. 900 articles were selected because of computational limitations in training the NLP model. A classification of “uses data” was assigned if the model predicted an article used data with at least 90% confidence.

The performance of the models classifying articles to countries and as using data or not can be compared to the classification by the human raters. We consider the human raters as giving us the ground truth. This may underestimate the model performance if the workers at times got the allocation wrong in a way that would not apply to the model. For instance, a human rater could mistake the Republic of Korea for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. If both humans and the model perform the same kind of errors, then the performance reported here will be overestimated.

The model was able to predict whether an article made use of data with 87% accuracy evaluated on the set of articles held out of the model training. The correlation between the number of articles written about each country using data estimated under the two approaches is given in the figure below. The number of articles represents an aggregate total of

Real World Evidence Solutions Market size was valued at USD 1.30 Billion in 2024 and is projected to reach USD 3.71 Billion by 2032, growing at a CAGR of 13.92% during the forecast period 2026-2032.Global Real World Evidence Solutions Market DriversThe market drivers for the Real World Evidence Solutions Market can be influenced by various factors. These may include:Growing Need for Evidence-Based Healthcare: Real-world evidence (RWE) is becoming more and more important in healthcare decision-making, according to stakeholders such as payers, providers, and regulators. In addition to traditional clinical trial data, RWE solutions offer important insights into the efficacy, safety, and value of healthcare interventions in real-world situations.Growing Use of RWE by Pharmaceutical Companies: RWE solutions are being used by pharmaceutical companies to assist with market entry, post-marketing surveillance, and drug development initiatives. Pharmaceutical businesses can find new indications for their current medications, improve clinical trial designs, and convince payers and providers of the worth of their products with the use of RWE.Increasing Priority for Value-Based Healthcare: The emphasis on proving the cost- and benefit-effectiveness of healthcare interventions in real-world settings is growing as value-based healthcare models gain traction. To assist value-based decision-making, RWE solutions are essential in evaluating the economic effect and real-world consequences of healthcare interventions.Technological and Data Analytics Advancements: RWE solutions are becoming more capable due to advances in machine learning, artificial intelligence, and big data analytics. With the use of these technologies, healthcare stakeholders can obtain actionable insights from the analysis of vast and varied datasets, including patient-generated data, claims data, and electronic health records.Regulatory Support for RWE Integration: RWE is being progressively integrated into regulatory decision-making processes by regulatory organisations including the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA's Real-World Evidence Programme and the EMA's Adaptive Pathways and PRIority MEdicines (PRIME) programme are two examples of initiatives that are making it easier to incorporate RWE into regulatory submissions and drug development.Increasing Emphasis on Patient-Centric Healthcare: The value of patient-reported outcomes and real-world experiences in healthcare decision-making is becoming more widely acknowledged. RWE technologies facilitate the collection and examination of patient-centered data, offering valuable insights into treatment efficacy, patient inclinations, and quality of life consequences.Extension of RWE Use Cases: RWE solutions are being used in medication development, post-market surveillance, health economics and outcomes research (HEOR), comparative effectiveness research, and market access, among other healthcare fields. The necessity for a variety of RWE solutions catered to the needs of different stakeholders is being driven by the expansion of RWE use cases.

Data sources, their sample sizes and LLIN indicators estimates derived from each source.

Doorda's UK Vulnerability Data provides a comprehensive database of over 1.8M postcodes sourced from 30 data sources, offering unparalleled insights for location intelligence and analytics purposes.

Volume and stats: - 1.8M Postcodes - 5 Vulnerability areas covered - 1-100 Vulnerability rating

Our Residential Real Estate Data offers a multitude of use cases: - Market Analysis - Identify Vulnerable Consumers - Mitigate Lead Generation Risk - Risk Management - Location Planning

The key benefits of leveraging our Residential Real Estate Data include: - Data Accuracy - Informed Decision-Making - Competitive Advantage - Efficiency - Single Source

Covering a wide range of industries and sectors, our data empowers organisations to make informed decisions, uncover market trends, and gain a competitive edge in the UK market.

This data is in sac format and includes recordings of two active source events from 238 three-component nodal seismometers deployed at Bradys Hot Springs geothermal field as part of the PoroTomo project. The source was a viberoseis truck operating in P-wave vibrational mode and generating a swept-frequency signal. The files are 33 seconds long starting 4 seconds before each sweep was initiated. There is some overlap in the file times.

Data source codeDescription10original FRIS sample based on cores for older forest (origin_year ≤ 1900)11original FRIS sample based on cores for areas lacking RS-FRIS12original FRIS sample non-core data (e.g., stratified sample, LULC) for areas lacking RS-FRIS21Leave trees, identified using remotely-sensed data, within LRM completed even-aged harvests. Origin year based on RS-FRIS predicted origin year.22RS-FRIS 2.0 predicted origin year.23RS-FRIS 3.0 predicted origin year.24RS-FRIS 4.0 predicted origin year.25RS-FRIS 5.0 predicted origin year.30LRM stand origin date or activity completion date within completed even-aged harvests.40Overrides. These are areas where new data were collected or other data sources override all existing sources.53, 54High severity (53) and very high severity (54) fires 2012-202161GNN71Establishment year from inherited inventory for Deep River Woods land transaction.This data set is periodically updated. Last update performed 2025-08-31

A collection of 22 data set of 50+ requirements each, expressed as user stories.

The dataset has been created by gathering data from web sources and we are not aware of license agreements or intellectual property rights on the requirements / user stories. The curator took utmost diligence in minimizing the risks of copyright infringement by using non-recent data that is less likely to be critical, by sampling a subset of the original requirements collection, and by qualitatively analyzing the requirements. In case of copyright infringement, please contact the dataset curator (Fabiano Dalpiaz, f.dalpiaz@uu.nl) to discuss the possibility of removal of that dataset [see Zenodo's policies]

The data sets have been originally used to conduct experiments about ambiguity detection with the REVV-Light tool: https://github.com/RELabUU/revv-light

This collection has been originally published in Mendeley data: https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/7zbk8zsd8y/1

Overview of the datasets [data and links added in December 2024]

The following text provides a description of the datasets, including links to the systems and websites, when available. The datasets are organized by macro-category and then by identifier.

Public administration and transparency

g02-federalspending.txt (2018) originates from early data in the Federal Spending Transparency project, which pertain to the website that is used to share publicly the spending data for the U.S. government. The website was created because of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). The specific dataset pertains a system called DAIMS or Data Broker, which stands for DATA Act Information Model Schema. The sample that was gathered refers to a sub-project related to allowing the government to act as a data broker, thereby providing data to third parties. The data for the Data Broker project is currently not available online, although the backend seems to be hosted in GitHub under a CC0 1.0 Universal license. Current and recent snapshots of federal spending related websites, including many more projects than the one described in the shared collection, can be found here.

g03-loudoun.txt (2018) is a set of extracted requirements from a document, by the Loudoun County Virginia, that describes the to-be user stories and use cases about a system for land management readiness assessment called Loudoun County LandMARC. The source document can be found here and it is part of the Electronic Land Management System and EPlan Review Project - RFP RFQ issued in March 2018. More information about the overall LandMARC system and services can be found here.

g04-recycling.txt(2017) concerns a web application where recycling and waste disposal facilities can be searched and located. The application operates through the visualization of a map that the user can interact with. The dataset has obtained from a GitHub website and it is at the basis of a students' project on web site design; the code is available (no license).

g05-openspending.txt (2018) is about the OpenSpending project (www), a project of the Open Knowledge foundation which aims at transparency about how local governments spend money. At the time of the collection, the data was retrieved from a Trello board that is currently unavailable. The sample focuses on publishing, importing and editing datasets, and how the data should be presented. Currently, OpenSpending is managed via a GitHub repository which contains multiple sub-projects with unknown license.

g11-nsf.txt (2018) refers to a collection of user stories referring to the NSF Site Redesign & Content Discovery project, which originates from a publicly accessible GitHub repository (GPL 2.0 license). In particular, the user stories refer to an early version of the NSF's website. The user stories can be found as closed Issues.

(Research) data and meta-data management

g08-frictionless.txt (2016) regards the Frictionless Data project, which offers an open source dataset for building data infrastructures, to be used by researchers, data scientists, and data engineers. Links to the many projects within the Frictionless Data project are on GitHub (with a mix of Unlicense and MIT license) and web. The specific set of user stories has been collected in 2016 by GitHub user @danfowler and are stored in a Trello board.

g14-datahub.txt (2013) concerns the open source project DataHub, which is currently developed via a GitHub repository (the code has Apache License 2.0). DataHub is a data discovery platform which has been developed over multiple years. The specific data set is an initial set of user stories, which we can date back to 2013 thanks to a comment therein.

g16-mis.txt (2015) is a collection of user stories that pertains a repository for researchers and archivists. The source of the dataset is a public Trello repository. Although the user stories do not have explicit links to projects, it can be inferred that the stories originate from some project related to the library of Duke University.

g17-cask.txt (2016) refers to the Cask Data Application Platform (CDAP). CDAP is an open source application platform (GitHub, under Apache License 2.0) that can be used to develop applications within the Apache Hadoop ecosystem, an open-source framework which can be used for distributed processing of large datasets. The user stories are extracted from a document that includes requirements regarding dataset management for Cask 4.0, which includes the scenarios, user stories and a design for the implementation of these user stories. The raw data is available in the following environment.

g18-neurohub.txt (2012) is concerned with the NeuroHub platform, a neuroscience data management, analysis and collaboration platform for researchers in neuroscience to collect, store, and share data with colleagues or with the research community. The user stories were collected at a time NeuroHub was still a research project sponsored by the UK Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC). For information about the research project from which the requirements were collected, see the following record.

g22-rdadmp.txt (2018) is a collection of user stories from the Research Data Alliance's working group on DMP Common Standards. Their GitHub repository contains a collection of user stories that were created by asking the community to suggest functionality that should part of a website that manages data management plans. Each user story is stored as an issue on the GitHub's page.

g23-archivesspace.txt (2012-2013) refers to ArchivesSpace: an open source, web application for managing archives information. The application is designed to support core functions in archives administration such as accessioning; description and arrangement of processed materials including analog, hybrid, and
born digital content; management of authorities and rights; and reference service. The application supports collection management through collection management records, tracking of events, and a growing number of administrative reports. ArchivesSpace is open source and its

Japan JP: SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data was reported at 84.050 NA in 2024. This stayed constant from the previous number of 84.050 NA for 2023. Japan JP: SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data is updated yearly, averaging 78.317 NA from Mar 2017 (Median) to 2024, with 8 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 84.050 NA in 2024 and a record low of 71.542 NA in 2017. Japan JP: SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Japan – Table JP.World Bank.WDI: Governance: Policy and Institutions. The data sources overall score is a composity measure of whether countries have data available from the following sources: Censuses and surveys, administrative data, geospatial data, and private sector/citizen generated data. The data sources (input) pillar is segmented by four types of sources generated by (i) the statistical office (censuses and surveys), and sources accessed from elsewhere such as (ii) administrative data, (iii) geospatial data, and (iv) private sector data and citizen generated data. The appropriate balance between these source types will vary depending on a country’s institutional setting and the maturity of its statistical system. High scores should reflect the extent to which the sources being utilized enable the necessary statistical indicators to be generated. For example, a low score on environment statistics (in the data production pillar) may reflect a lack of use of (and low score for) geospatial data (in the data sources pillar). This type of linkage is inherent in the data cycle approach and can help highlight areas for investment required if country needs are to be met.;Statistical Performance Indicators, The World Bank (https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/statistical-performance-indicators);Weighted average;

Data supporting the Master thesis "Monitoring von Open Data Praktiken - Herausforderungen beim Auffinden von Datenpublikationen am Beispiel der Publikationen von Forschenden der TU Dresden" (Monitoring open data practices - challenges in finding data publications using the example of publications by researchers at TU Dresden) - Katharina Zinke, Institut für Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaften, Humboldt-Universität Berlin, 2023

This ZIP-File contains the data the thesis is based on, interim exports of the results and the R script with all pre-processing, data merging and analyses carried out. The documentation of the additional, explorative analysis is also available. The actual PDFs and text files of the scientific papers used are not included as they are published open access.

The folder structure is shown below with the file names and a brief description of the contents of each file. For details concerning the analyses approach, please refer to the master's thesis (publication following soon).

## Data sources

Folder 01_SourceData/

- PLOS-Dataset_v2_Mar23.csv (PLOS-OSI dataset)

- ScopusSearch_ExportResults.csv (export of Scopus search results from Scopus)

- ScopusSearch_ExportResults.ris (export of Scopus search results from Scopus)

- Zotero_Export_ScopusSearch.csv (export of the file names and DOIs of the Scopus search results from Zotero)

## Automatic classification

Folder 02_AutomaticClassification/

- (NOT INCLUDED) PDFs folder (Folder for PDFs of all publications identified by the Scopus search, named AuthorLastName_Year_PublicationTitle_Title)

- (NOT INCLUDED) PDFs_to_text folder (Folder for all texts extracted from the PDFs by ODDPub, named AuthorLastName_Year_PublicationTitle_Title)

- PLOS_ScopusSearch_matched.csv (merge of the Scopus search results with the PLOS_OSI dataset for the files contained in both)

- oddpub_results_wDOIs.csv (results file of the ODDPub classification)

- PLOS_ODDPub.csv (merge of the results file of the ODDPub classification with the PLOS-OSI dataset for the publications contained in both)

## Manual coding

Folder 03_ManualCheck/

- CodeSheet_ManualCheck.txt (Code sheet with descriptions of the variables for manual coding)

- ManualCheck_2023-06-08.csv (Manual coding results file)

- PLOS_ODDPub_Manual.csv (Merge of the results file of the ODDPub and PLOS-OSI classification with the results file of the manual coding)

## Explorative analysis for the discoverability of open data

Folder04_FurtherAnalyses

Proof_of_of_Concept_Open_Data_Monitoring.pdf (Description of the explorative analysis of the discoverability of open data publications using the example of a researcher) - in German

## R-Script

Analyses_MA_OpenDataMonitoring.R (R-Script for preparing, merging and analyzing the data and for performing the ODDPub algorithm)

Palau SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data was reported at 53.817 NA in 2023. This stayed constant from the previous number of 53.817 NA for 2022. Palau SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data is updated yearly, averaging 53.317 NA from Sep 2020 (Median) to 2023, with 4 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 53.817 NA in 2023 and a record low of 52.817 NA in 2021. Palau SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Palau – Table PW.World Bank.WDI: Governance: Policy and Institutions. The data sources overall score is a composity measure of whether countries have data available from the following sources: Censuses and surveys, administrative data, geospatial data, and private sector/citizen generated data. The data sources (input) pillar is segmented by four types of sources generated by (i) the statistical office (censuses and surveys), and sources accessed from elsewhere such as (ii) administrative data, (iii) geospatial data, and (iv) private sector data and citizen generated data. The appropriate balance between these source types will vary depending on a country’s institutional setting and the maturity of its statistical system. High scores should reflect the extent to which the sources being utilized enable the necessary statistical indicators to be generated. For example, a low score on environment statistics (in the data production pillar) may reflect a lack of use of (and low score for) geospatial data (in the data sources pillar). This type of linkage is inherent in the data cycle approach and can help highlight areas for investment required if country needs are to be met.;Statistical Performance Indicators, The World Bank (https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/statistical-performance-indicators);Weighted average;

Information on all data sets used in meta-analysis. Column “Name” refers to abbreviations used in Figure 2- and Figure S1–S5. “Study title” refers to name of original source article, with reference given in column “PMID [Ref]”. Column “No. samples” gives number of samples in each group in the relevant data set, with the following group names: N – Normal controls, CD – Crohn’s disease, UC – Ulcerative colitis, CDU – Un-inflamed Crohn’s disease and UCU – Un-inflamed ulcerative colitis. Column “Platform” refers to microarray technology used in the relevant analysis.

This dataset is comprised of a collection of example DMPs from a wide array of fields; obtained from a number of different sources outlined in the README. Data included/extracted from the examples included the discipline and field of study, author, institutional affiliation and funding information, location, date modified, title, research and data-type, description of project, link to the DMP, and where possible external links to related publications, grant pages, or French language versions. This CSV document serves as the content for a McMaster Data Management Plan (DMP) Database as part of the Research Data Management (RDM) Services website, located at https://u.mcmaster.ca/dmps. Other universities and organizations are encouraged to link to the DMP Database or use this dataset as the content for their own DMP Database. This dataset will be updated regularly to include new additions and will be versioned as such. We are gathering submissions at https://u.mcmaster.ca/submit-a-dmp to continue to expand the collection.

This dataset is based on the Sample Leads Dataset and is intended to allow some simple filtering by lead source. I had modified this dataset to support an upcoming Towards Data Science article walking through the process. Link to be shared once published.

North Macedonia MK: SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data was reported at 55.983 NA in 2019. This stayed constant from the previous number of 55.983 NA for 2018. North Macedonia MK: SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data is updated yearly, averaging 57.479 NA from Dec 2016 (Median) to 2019, with 4 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 59.250 NA in 2016 and a record low of 55.983 NA in 2019. North Macedonia MK: SPI: Pillar 4 Data Sources Score: Scale 0-100 data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s North Macedonia – Table MK.World Bank.WDI: Governance: Policy and Institutions. The data sources overall score is a composity measure of whether countries have data available from the following sources: Censuses and surveys, administrative data, geospatial data, and private sector/citizen generated data. The data sources (input) pillar is segmented by four types of sources generated by (i) the statistical office (censuses and surveys), and sources accessed from elsewhere such as (ii) administrative data, (iii) geospatial data, and (iv) private sector data and citizen generated data. The appropriate balance between these source types will vary depending on a country’s institutional setting and the maturity of its statistical system. High scores should reflect the extent to which the sources being utilized enable the necessary statistical indicators to be generated. For example, a low score on environment statistics (in the data production pillar) may reflect a lack of use of (and low score for) geospatial data (in the data sources pillar). This type of linkage is inherent in the data cycle approach and can help highlight areas for investment required if country needs are to be met.;Statistical Performance Indicators, The World Bank (https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/statistical-performance-indicators);Weighted average;