Poster presented at the Research Data Alliance 5th Plenary Meeting, March 2015. To best encourage data publishing by scientific researchers, the burden of submission needs to be low. Data archiving at the time of and in conjunction with article publication can be an effective means, by catching authors when they’re motivated and tying data submission into an already-familiar publication process. Here we share Dryad’s experiences with integrating journals using various workflows.

The journals’ author guidelines and/or editorial policies were examined on whether they take a stance with regard to the availability of the underlying data of the submitted article. The mere explicated possibility of providing supplementary material along with the submitted article was not considered as a research data policy in the present study. Furthermore, the present article excluded source codes or algorithms from the scope of the paper and thus policies related to them are not included in the analysis of the present article.

For selection of journals within the field of neurosciences, Clarivate Analytics’ InCites Journal Citation Reports database was searched using categories of neurosciences and neuroimaging. From the results, journals with the 40 highest Impact Factor (for the year 2017) indicators were extracted for scrutiny of research data policies. Respectively, the selection journals within the field of physics was created by performing a similar search with the categories of physics, applied; physics, atomic, molecular & chemical; physics, condensed matter; physics, fluids & plasmas; physics, mathematical; physics, multidisciplinary; physics, nuclear and physics, particles & fields. From the results, journals with the 40 highest Impact Factor indicators were again extracted for scrutiny. Similarly, the 40 journals representing the field of operations research were extracted by using the search category of operations research and management.

Journal-specific data policies were sought from journal specific websites providing journal specific author guidelines or editorial policies. Within the present study, the examination of journal data policies was done in May 2019. The primary data source was journal-specific author guidelines. If journal guidelines explicitly linked to the publisher’s general policy with regard to research data, these were used in the analyses of the present article. If journal-specific research data policy, or lack of, was inconsistent with the publisher’s general policies, the journal-specific policies and guidelines were prioritized and used in the present article’s data. If journals’ author guidelines were not openly available online due to, e.g., accepting submissions on an invite-only basis, the journal was not included in the data of the present article. Also journals that exclusively publish review articles were excluded and replaced with the journal having the next highest Impact Factor indicator so that each set representing the three field of sciences consisted of 40 journals. The final data thus consisted of 120 journals in total.

‘Public deposition’ refers to a scenario where researcher deposits data to a public repository and thus gives the administrative role of the data to the receiving repository. ‘Scientific sharing’ refers to a scenario where researcher administers his or her data locally and by request provides it to interested reader. Note that none of the journals examined in the present article required that all data types underlying a submitted work should be deposited into a public data repositories. However, some journals required public deposition of data of specific types. Within the journal research data policies examined in the present article, these data types are well presented by the Springer Nature policy on “Availability of data, materials, code and protocols” (Springer Nature, 2018), that is, DNA and RNA data; protein sequences and DNA and RNA sequencing data; genetic polymorphisms data; linked phenotype and genotype data; gene expression microarray data; proteomics data; macromolecular structures and crystallographic data for small molecules. Furthermore, the registration of clinical trials in a public repository was also considered as a data type in this study. The term specific data types used in the custom coding framework of the present study thus refers to both life sciences data and public registration of clinical trials. These data types have community-endorsed public repositories where deposition was most often mandated within the journals’ research data policies.

The term ‘location’ refers to whether the journal’s data policy provides suggestions or requirements for the repositories or services used to share the underlying data of the submitted works. A mere general reference to ‘public repositories’ was not considered a location suggestion, but only references to individual repositories and services. The category of ‘immediate release of data’ examines whether the journals’ research data policy addresses the timing of publication of the underlying data of submitted works. Note that even though the journals may only encourage public deposition of the data, the editorial processes could be set up so that it leads to either publication of the research data or the research data metadata in conjunction to publishing of the submitted work.

Questionnaire data for DRYAD 2018 07 26Data from questionnaires sent to authors of papers in the research domain of Ecology. The column header are mostly self-explanatory. They are: ResponseID: a serial number linking rows corresponding to multiple submissions of the same manuscript (MS). Note that some MSs were submitted repeatedly to the same journal. Invited MS: Was the manuscript invited by the journal for publication? Round start: A serial number for the round of submission of each manuscript, beginning with 1, and incrementing upwards. Round end: A serial number for the outcome of each submission round, beginning with 2 and incrementing upwards. Note that the final round of submission is given identifier 99. Journal start: To which journal was the MS submitted in this round? Journal end: To which journal was the MS next submitted? Note that this may be the same as Journal Start, if the manuscript was not rejected. If it was rejected, then it will (typically) differ. JIF st...

Research data related to the figure panels that are represented in the manuscript.

International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research Acceptance Rate - ResearchHelpDesk - IJSTR - International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research is an open access international journal from diverse fields in sciences, engineering, and technologies Open Access that emphasizes new research, development, and applications. Papers reporting original research or extended versions of already published conference/journal papers are all welcomed. Papers for publication are selected through peer review to ensure originality, relevance, and readability. IJSTR ensures a wide indexing policy to make published papers highly visible to the scientific community. IJSTR is part of the eco-friendly community and favors e-publication mode for being an online 'GREEN journal'. IJSTR is an international peer-reviewed, electronic, online journal published monthly. The aim and scope of the journal is to provide an academic medium and an important reference for the advancement and dissemination of research results that support high-level learning, teaching, and research in the fields of engineering, science, and technology. Original theoretical work and application-based studies, which contribute to a better understanding of engineering, science, and technological challenges, are encouraged. IJSTR Publication Charges IJSTR covers the costs partially through article processing fees. IJSTR expenses are split among peer review administration and management, production of articles in PDF format, editorial costs, electronic composition and production, journal information system, manuscript management system, electronic archiving, overhead expenses, and administrative costs. Moreover, we are providing research paper publishing in minimum available costing such as there are no charges for rejected articles, no submission charges, and no surcharges based on the figures or supplementary data. IJSTR Publication Indexing IJSTR ​​​​​submit all published papers to indexing partners. Indexing totally depends on the content, indexing partner guidelines, and their indexing procedures. This is the reason sometimes indexing happens immediately and sometimes it takes time. Publication with IJSTR does not guarantee that paper will surely be added indexing partner website. The whole process for including any article (s) in the Scopus database is done by the Scopus team only. Journal or Publication House doesn't have any involvement in the decision whether to accept or reject a paper for the Scopus database and cannot influence the processing time of paper. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research RG Journal Impact: 0.31 * *This value is calculated using ResearchGate data and is based on average citation counts from work published in this journal. The data used in the calculation may not be exhaustive. RG Journal impact history 2018 / 2019 0.31 2017 0.34 2016 0.33 2015 0.36 2014 0.19 Is Ijstr Scopus indexed? Yes IJSTR - International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research Journal is Scopus indexed. please visit for more details - IJSTR Scoups

United States agricultural researchers have many options for making their data available online. This dataset aggregates the primary sources of ag-related data and determines where researchers are likely to deposit their agricultural data. These data serve as both a current landscape analysis and also as a baseline for future studies of ag research data. Purpose As sources of agricultural data become more numerous and disparate, and collaboration and open data become more expected if not required, this research provides a landscape inventory of online sources of open agricultural data. An inventory of current agricultural data sharing options will help assess how the Ag Data Commons, a platform for USDA-funded data cataloging and publication, can best support data-intensive and multi-disciplinary research. It will also help agricultural librarians assist their researchers in data management and publication. The goals of this study were to

establish where agricultural researchers in the United States-- land grant and USDA researchers, primarily ARS, NRCS, USFS and other agencies -- currently publish their data, including general research data repositories, domain-specific databases, and the top journals compare how much data is in institutional vs. domain-specific vs. federal platforms determine which repositories are recommended by top journals that require or recommend the publication of supporting data ascertain where researchers not affiliated with funding or initiatives possessing a designated open data repository can publish data

Approach The National Agricultural Library team focused on Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and United States Forest Service (USFS) style research data, rather than ag economics, statistics, and social sciences data. To find domain-specific, general, institutional, and federal agency repositories and databases that are open to US research submissions and have some amount of ag data, resources including re3data, libguides, and ARS lists were analysed. Primarily environmental or public health databases were not included, but places where ag grantees would publish data were considered.
Search methods We first compiled a list of known domain specific USDA / ARS datasets / databases that are represented in the Ag Data Commons, including ARS Image Gallery, ARS Nutrition Databases (sub-components), SoyBase, PeanutBase, National Fungus Collection, i5K Workspace @ NAL, and GRIN. We then searched using search engines such as Bing and Google for non-USDA / federal ag databases, using Boolean variations of “agricultural data” /“ag data” / “scientific data” + NOT + USDA (to filter out the federal / USDA results). Most of these results were domain specific, though some contained a mix of data subjects. We then used search engines such as Bing and Google to find top agricultural university repositories using variations of “agriculture”, “ag data” and “university” to find schools with agriculture programs. Using that list of universities, we searched each university web site to see if their institution had a repository for their unique, independent research data if not apparent in the initial web browser search. We found both ag specific university repositories and general university repositories that housed a portion of agricultural data. Ag specific university repositories are included in the list of domain-specific repositories. Results included Columbia University – International Research Institute for Climate and Society, UC Davis – Cover Crops Database, etc. If a general university repository existed, we determined whether that repository could filter to include only data results after our chosen ag search terms were applied. General university databases that contain ag data included Colorado State University Digital Collections, University of Michigan ICPSR (Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research), and University of Minnesota DRUM (Digital Repository of the University of Minnesota). We then split out NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information) repositories. Next we searched the internet for open general data repositories using a variety of search engines, and repositories containing a mix of data, journals, books, and other types of records were tested to determine whether that repository could filter for data results after search terms were applied. General subject data repositories include Figshare, Open Science Framework, PANGEA, Protein Data Bank, and Zenodo. Finally, we compared scholarly journal suggestions for data repositories against our list to fill in any missing repositories that might contain agricultural data. Extensive lists of journals were compiled, in which USDA published in 2012 and 2016, combining search results in ARIS, Scopus, and the Forest Service's TreeSearch, plus the USDA web sites Economic Research Service (ERS), National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Natural Resources and Conservation Service (NRCS), Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), Rural Development (RD), and Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). The top 50 journals' author instructions were consulted to see if they (a) ask or require submitters to provide supplemental data, or (b) require submitters to submit data to open repositories. Data are provided for Journals based on a 2012 and 2016 study of where USDA employees publish their research studies, ranked by number of articles, including 2015/2016 Impact Factor, Author guidelines, Supplemental Data?, Supplemental Data reviewed?, Open Data (Supplemental or in Repository) Required? and Recommended data repositories, as provided in the online author guidelines for each the top 50 journals. Evaluation We ran a series of searches on all resulting general subject databases with the designated search terms. From the results, we noted the total number of datasets in the repository, type of resource searched (datasets, data, images, components, etc.), percentage of the total database that each term comprised, any dataset with a search term that comprised at least 1% and 5% of the total collection, and any search term that returned greater than 100 and greater than 500 results. We compared domain-specific databases and repositories based on parent organization, type of institution, and whether data submissions were dependent on conditions such as funding or affiliation of some kind. Results A summary of the major findings from our data review:

Over half of the top 50 ag-related journals from our profile require or encourage open data for their published authors. There are few general repositories that are both large AND contain a significant portion of ag data in their collection. GBIF (Global Biodiversity Information Facility), ICPSR, and ORNL DAAC were among those that had over 500 datasets returned with at least one ag search term and had that result comprise at least 5% of the total collection.
Not even one quarter of the domain-specific repositories and datasets reviewed allow open submission by any researcher regardless of funding or affiliation.

See included README file for descriptions of each individual data file in this dataset. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Journals. File Name: Journals.csvResource Title: Journals - Recommended repositories. File Name: Repos_from_journals.csvResource Title: TDWG presentation. File Name: TDWG_Presentation.pptxResource Title: Domain Specific ag data sources. File Name: domain_specific_ag_databases.csvResource Title: Data Dictionary for Ag Data Repository Inventory. File Name: Ag_Data_Repo_DD.csvResource Title: General repositories containing ag data. File Name: general_repos_1.csvResource Title: README and file inventory. File Name: README_InventoryPublicDBandREepAgData.txt

Researchers seeking to share their data with coordinating centers such as the National Database for Autism Research (NDAR), face numerous barriers to establishing new connections and maintaining existing ones. We sought to dramatically reduce the time and money required to establish and maintain the interoperability of data between research centers, by establishing a process where manual recoding of data is replaced by data sharing instructions in the form of extraction and transformation scripts. Over the course of seven typical (20-60 subjects, 400-1000 fields each) data submissions to NDAR, the need for duplication, retranscription, or restructuring of the source data was fully eliminated. Separating the extraction and transformation scripts from data files also eradicated the impact of additional data collection on the time required to repeat successful transmissions. Revision controlled management of these scripts also provided a new benefit: traceability of the transformation process itself. Now, point-in-time retrieval of extraction scripts and explanations for modifications to the data sharing interface are possible. This method has proven to be successful and efficient for interfacing research data with NDAR. It presents little-to-no impact to transmitting investigators’ data, ensures high data integrity, trivializes the complexities of repeatedly modifying a growing dataset over time, and introduces traceability to the collaborative process of integrating two collections of data with one another.

BackgroundThe widespread reluctance to share published research data is often hypothesized to be due to the authors' fear that reanalysis may expose errors in their work or may produce conclusions that contradict their own. However, these hypotheses have not previously been studied systematically. Methods and FindingsWe related the reluctance to share research data for reanalysis to 1148 statistically significant results reported in 49 papers published in two major psychology journals. We found the reluctance to share data to be associated with weaker evidence (against the null hypothesis of no effect) and a higher prevalence of apparent errors in the reporting of statistical results. The unwillingness to share data was particularly clear when reporting errors had a bearing on statistical significance. ConclusionsOur findings on the basis of psychological papers suggest that statistical results are particularly hard to verify when reanalysis is more likely to lead to contrasting conclusions. This highlights the importance of establishing mandatory data archiving policies.

The goals of this project were to compare research integrity content in Instructions for Authors in ICMJE member journals with those in the English- and Japanese-language journals of the Japanese Association of Medical Sciences (JAMS).

Therefore, this dataset contents include the following three categories: 1) journals' background information, 2) description numbers of research integrity topics, and 3) journal numbers that required ICMJE description forms in ICMJE member journals, English- and Japanese-language journals.

A list of NIH-supported repositories that accept submissions of appropriate scientific research data from biomedical researchers. It includes resources that aggregate information about biomedical data and information sharing systems. Links are provided to information about submitting data to and accessing data from the listed repositories. Additional information about the repositories and points-of contact for further information or inquiries can be found on the websites of the individual repositories.

This dataset contains the data availability statements (DAS) from four Nature Portfolio journals from January 2017 to December 2021. This covers two periods; one prior to integrating the figshare repository with the submission system of each journal (January 2017 to December 2021) and one following the integration (April 2022 to July 2023).Each DAS is assigned one or more of seven categories based on its content and any links to available data. This enables analysis of changes in data sharing behaviour, for example either side of the figshare integration.Summary statistics by year and the DAS categories are provided in separate tabs of the worksheet. DAS were initially assigned by basic text-matching (for example the presence of key terms like 'request' in the DAS indicating data are available on request). A human curator then verified each article's categorisation and amended if necessary.

Arabian journal for science and engineering Acceptance Rate - ResearchHelpDesk - The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering (AJSE) is a peer-reviewed journal owned by King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals and published by Springer. AJSE publishes twelve issues of rigorous and original contributions in the Science disciplines of Biological Sciences, Chemistry, Earth Sciences, and Physics, and in the Engineering disciplines of Chemical, Civil, Computer Science and Engineering, Electrical, Mechanical, Petroleum, and Systems Engineering. Manuscripts must be submitted in the English language and authors must ensure that the article has not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere in any format and that there are no ethical concerns with the contents or data collection. The authors warrant that the information submitted is not redundant and respects general guidelines of ethics in publishing. All papers are evaluated by at least two international referees, who are known scholars in their fields. About KFUPM King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM) in Saudi Arabia is a leading educational organization for science and technology. The vast petroleum and mineral resources of the Kingdom pose a complex and exciting challenge for scientific, technical, and management education. To meet this challenge, the University has adopted advanced training in the fields of science, engineering, and management as one of its goals in order to promote leadership and service in the Kingdom’s petroleum and mineral industries. The University also furthers knowledge through research in these fields. In addition, because it derives a distinctive character from its being a technological university in the land of Islam, the University is unreservedly committed to deepening and broadening the faith of its Muslim students and to instilling in them an appreciation of the major contributions of their people to the world of mathematics and science. All areas of KFUPM - facilities, faculty, students, and programs - are directed to the attainment of these goals. About AJSE Arabian Journal of Science and Engineering - Sections King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM) partnered with Springer to publish the Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering (AJSE). AJSE, which has been published by KFUPM since 1975, is a recognized national, regional and international journal that provides a great opportunity for the dissemination of research advances from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, MENA and the world. Arabian Journal of Science and Engineering AJSE publishes twelve issues in both the Engineering (AJSE-Engineering) and Science (AJSE-Science) disciplines. The publication of thematic/special issues on specific topics is also considered. AJSE-Engineering AJSE-Engineering is a section of the Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering (AJSE). It publishes original contributions and refereed research papers in the disciplines of Civil, Chemical, Electrical, Mechanical and Petroleum Engineering, Computer Science and Engineering, and Systems Engineering. AJSE-Engineering publishes full-length original articles, review articles on specialized topics, technical notes, and technical reports. AJSE-Science Chemistry, Earth Sciences, Physics and now also: Biological Sciences AJSE-Science is a section of the Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering (AJSE). AJSE-Science publishes original contributions and refereed research papers in the disciplines of Chemistry, Earth Sciences, Physics, and now also Biological Sciences. AJSE-Science publishes full-length original articles, review articles on specialized topics, technical notes, and technical reports. Abstracted/Indexed in: Academic Search, CSA/Proquest, Current Abstracts, Current Contents/Engineering, Computing and Technology, Current Index to Statistics, EBSCO, Google Scholar, INIS Atomindex, OCLC, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), SCOPUS, Summon by Serial Solutions, Zentralblatt Math RG Journal Impact: 0.93 * *This value is calculated using ResearchGate data and is based on average citation counts from work published in this journal. The data used in the calculation may not be exhaustive. RG Journal impact history 2020 Available summer 2021 2018 / 2019 0.93 2017 1.12 2016 0.99 2015 1.04 2014 1.17 2013 0.63 2012 0.55 2011 0.58 2010 0.36 2009 0.37 2008 0.15 2007 0.16 2006 0.12 2005 0.25 2004 0.12 2003 0.20 2002 0.10 2001 0.14 2000 0.06 Additional details Cited half-life 4.50 Immediacy index 0.09 Eigenfactor 0.00 Article influence 0.14 Website http://www.kfupm.edu.sa/publications/ajse/ Website description Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering website Other titles Arabian Journal for science and engineering (online), AJSE ISSN 1319-8025 OCLC 264802239 Material type Periodical, Internet resource Document type Internet Resource, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Fast dissemination of research is important for improving treatments and thus benefitting patients, caregivers, and researchers. However, getting scientific papers published may take a long time. The editorial handling time can be delayed by several processes both before and after acceptance of the paper. The aim of this study was to systematically review the editorial handling time of biomedical peer-reviewed literature (i.e. time from submission to publication). The protocol for this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020196238). PubMed and EMBASE were searched systematically on 29 May 2020. We included publications on the timespan between submission and publication for accepted articles published in biomedical journals. Of the 4197 unique studies identified in the search, 69 were included in the systematic review. The mean timespan from submission to publication varied from 91 to 639 days, while the median timespan varied from 70 to 558 days. Submission to acceptance and acceptance to publication timespans showed similar disparity with means ranging from 50 to 276 and 11 to 362 days, respectively. Data were too statistically heterogeneous to perform meta-analyses. Editorial handling times of journals varied widely from a few months to almost two years, which delays the availability of new evidence. The editorial handling time did not differ between submission-to-acceptance-time and acceptance-to-publication-time. Examining differences in editorial processes between journals with long and short editorial handling times may help uncover, which processes are frequent causes of delay and thereby where to improve.

This article addresses the underrepresentation of Global South scholars in Global North journals. In order to explore this issue, we conducted a study on the submission decisions of Global South scholars, with a focus on International Relations (IR). We collected novel data on IR scholars based in Latin America and conducted a conjoint experiment on a sample of 446 scholars. Our study provides the first experimental evidence of journal submission choice in Political Science in the Global South. Our findings indicate that both journal attributes and individual characteristics impact the choice of journal, including factors such as language, editorial location, and acceptance rates. This research has important implications for the discipline and for journal editors in the Global North, as it provides valuable insights on how to promote diversity in academic publishing as well as the limits of such strategies.

This dataset contains the data that supports the following paper: Féret, R. and Cros, M., 2019. The embedded research librarian: a project partner. LIBER Quarterly, 29(1), pp.1–20. DOI: 10.18352/lq.10304

The dataset contains 3 files related to the bibliographic metadata of the publications of the 7 H2020 projects supported by the University Library of Lille and a general file providing the data for the table, figure 2 and 3 and for the data on H2020 projects coordinators:

figures: this file contains the information related to the projects supported by the Library, including the data presented in the figure 2 (tab 1), the figure 3 (tab 2), the table 1 (tab 3) and the data on 2020 project coordinators (tab 4).

wos_publications : the data extracted from the Web of Science for 106 publications (.txt, UTF-8, Windows), searched on the base of the 7 H2020 projects Cordis number.

refined_wos_publications : the same data after having been transformed into a .xlsx format in the tool OpenRefine.

processed_publications : contains the main bibliographic data (authors, article title, source title, DOI, date of publication) and their open status.

Abstract of the paper This paper presents new services developed by the Lille University Library for European and National research project coordinators. This is a specific audience that libraries are not used to target, with a widely recognised institutional status and academic background. Supporting them in their coordination activities is an opportunity to gain a new role for libraries, which starts from the design of research at the submission stage and lasts several years after, during the project lifetime. These services help coordinators to meet their funders’ expectations on open access and research data management. It is also a way to develop new collaborations with research units and some university services, such as the Grant Office. The Lille University Library has already supported the writing of forty grant proposals since 2017, including about thirty since early 2019. The Library currently follows twelve projects on open access, research data management or both. This second figure is likely to increase in 2020 due to the number of projects supported at submission stage since the beginning of 2019. The paper describes our set of services and the lessons we learned from our approach.

The draft guidance document clarifies the requirements for eligible drug submissions and applications under the administrative pathway. These submissions and applications do not contain scientific data, or require regulatory review.

Objective: Routinely collected health data, collected for administrative and clinical purposes, without specific a priori research questions, are increasingly used for observational, comparative effectiveness, health services research, and clinical trials. The rapid evolution and availability of routinely collected data for research has brought to light specific issues not addressed by existing reporting guidelines. The aim of the present project was to determine the priorities of stakeholders in order to guide the development of the REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement. Methods: Two modified electronic Delphi surveys were sent to stakeholders. The first determined themes deemed important to include in the RECORD statement, and was analyzed using qualitative methods. The second determined quantitative prioritization of the themes based on categorization of manuscript headings. The surveys were followed by a meeting of RECORD working committee, and re-engagement with stakeholders via an online commentary period. Results: The qualitative survey (76 responses of 123 surveys sent) generated 10 overarching themes and 13 themes derived from existing STROBE categories. Highest-rated overall items for inclusion were: Disease/exposure identification algorithms; Characteristics of the population included in databases; and Characteristics of the data. In the quantitative survey (71 responses of 135 sent), the importance assigned to each of the compiled themes varied depending on the manuscript section to which they were assigned. Following the working committee meeting, online ranking by stakeholders provided feedback and resulted in revision of the final checklist. Conclusions: The RECORD statement incorporated the suggestions provided by a large, diverse group of stakeholders to create a reporting checklist specific to observational research using routinely collected health data. Our findings point to unique aspects of studies conducted with routinely collected health data and the perceived need for better reporting of methodological issues.

Scripts and data acquired at the Mirror Lake Research Site, cited by the article submitted to Water Resources Research: Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) as a Distributed Hydraulic Sensor in Fractured Bedrock M. W. Becker(1), T. I. Coleman(2), and C. C. Ciervo(1) 1 California State University, Long Beach, Geology Department, 1250 Bellflower Boulevard, Long Beach, California, 90840, USA. 2 Silixa LLC, 3102 W Broadway St, Suite A, Missoula MT 59808, USA. Corresponding author: Matthew W. Becker (matt.becker@csulb.edu).

This folder contains data applicable for submission to Scientific Data for the article "Assessing the Digital Disability Risk in Older Adults in China," authored by Dan Chen and Lijian Wang. It includes:Sample 1 Questionnaire and Sample 1 Data, corresponding to Sample 1 in the article.Sample 2 Questionnaire and Sample 2 Data, corresponding to Sample 2 in the article.

Preprints have established a stable position in the dissemination of scientific findings. This position has been reinforced by the Covid-19 pandemic, which required the rapid dissemination of new scientific information. However, in most cases, preprints have not undergone peer review and, as a consequence, lack the scientific rigor of other scientific publications such as journal articles. This presents a challenge for journalists who are tasked with keeping the public informed about the latest scientific developments in the context of great uncertainty during a global pandemic. Having to report on rapidly changing circumstances under increasing pressure from social media while also having to compete for attention in a saturated media landscape might place strain on the adherence to journalistic norms. This does not only have implications in terms of the case-by-case accuracy of reporting, but on the public perception of science at large.

This paper investigates the reporting of scientific information from pre-preprints based on a sample of 2,877 online news articles related to Covid-19 in the South African news media. Our results show that despite the publication of guidelines for reporting on preprints in the media, there is still a way to go regarding the judicious use of scientific information from preprints by journalists.

The dataset includes the table of the 2,877 online news articles as well as the analysis done (as separate tables).

Fields in the dataset: Full Text, Headline, ID, Publication Date, Site Name,URL,Syndicated, Covid-related scientific research findings, Preprint, Title, Authors,DOI, Archive / journal, URL