Knowledge: Other: Sensitive data

Citationsort descending Purpose Method Study Type
Averkamp, S., Gu X., & Rogers B. (2014).  Data Management at the University of Iowa: A University Libraries Report on Campus Research Data Needs. This data management report was commissioned by the University of Iowa Libraries with the intention of performing a survey of the campus landscape and identifying gaps in data management services The first stage of data collection consisted of a survey conducted during summer 2012 to which 784 responses were received. The second phase of data collection consisted of approximately 40 in-depth interviews with individuals from the campus and were completed during summer 2013. The individuals engaged during the data collection phase spanned a diverse set of campus programs but should not be considered comprehensive. Information Technology Services was invited to participate in the interview process and has also contributed to this report. Measurement, Wider
Beile, P. (2014).  The UCF Research Data Management Survey: A report of faculty practices and needs. Investigated faculty data management needs and practices at the University of Central Florida Conducted an online survey containing 33 questions. There were 534 valid recipients and 97 who partially or fully completed the survey. Measurement, Wider
Gibbs, H. (2009).  Southampton Data Survey: Our Experience and Lessons Learned. To pilot the Digital Asset Framework (or Digital Audit Framework) methodology Used a modified version of the Digital Asset Framework; modified mainly due to time considerations; distributed an online questionnaire and follow-up interviews with researchers at the University of Southampton Measurement, Wider
McLure, M., Level A., Cranston C., Oehlerts B., & Culbertson M. (2014).  Data Curation: A Study of Researcher Practices and Needs. portal: Libraries and the Academy. 14(2), 139 - 164. Investigated (1) the nature of data sets that researchers create or maintain; (2) How participants manage their data; (3) Needs for support that the participants identify in relation to sharing, curating, and preserving their data; and (4) The feasibility of adapting the Purdue University Libraries’ Data Curation Profiles Toolkit1 interview protocol for use in focus groups with researchers Conducted five focus groups with 31 faculty, research scientists, and research associates Measurement, Wider
Mitcham, J., Awre C., Allinson J., Green R., & Wilson S. (2015).  Filling the Digital Preservation Gap. A JISC Research Data Spring Project. Phase One Report. Investigated the use of Archivematica, a system designed to prepare data for long-term storage and access, to help preserve research data Reviewed funder obligations for data management and requirements for digital preservation and analyzed how Archivematica measures against them; conducted online surveys of research staff and students at York University to understand the landscape of research data management at York, and to gain insight into the software packages and top applications used; tested Archivematica with a range of file sizes, types, directory structures, descriptive information, workflows within Archivematica, and different places Archivematica could occupy in a broader research data management workflow. Measurement, Targeted, Wider
Open Exeter Project Team (2012).  Summary Findings of the Open Exeter Data Asset Framework Survey. Investigated how researchers at the University of Exeter created data, where they stored their data, whether they backed up their data and what happened to their data when the project was finished Adapted from the Data Curation Centre’s Data Asset Framework methodology, an online survey was created and follow up interviews were conducted with respondents. Measurement, Wider
Bigagli, L., Sveinsdottir T., Wessels B., Smallwood R., Linde P., Tsoukala V., et al. (2014).  Infrastructural and technological challenges and potential solutions. Investigated infrastructural and technological barriers to Open Access and preservation of research data in Europe. This work was conducted within the EU FP7 funded project RECODE, which focuses on developing policy recommendations for Open Access to Research Data in Europe. In particular, this work is coordinated by RECODE Work Package 2 (WP2), Infrastructure and technology. It distinguishes between different categories of stakeholders in terms of how the experience and respond to these challenges Conducted desk research, an online survey, interviews, and a validation workshop Measurement, Metrics, Wider
Finn, R., Wadhwa K., Taylor M. J., Sveinsdottir T., Noorman M., & Sondervan J. (2014).  Legal and ethical barriers and good practice solutions. Identify legal and ethical issues relevant to open access to research data in Europe, identify examples that illuminate these issues, and identify potential solutions currently being used to address these issues Conducted a literature review, five disciplinary case studies, and a validation workshop Measurement, Wider
Sveinsdottir, T., Wessels B., Smallwood R., Linde P., Kala V., Tsoukala V., et al. (2013).  Stakeholder values and relationships within open access and data dissemination and preservation ecosystems. Identify and map the diverse range of stakeholder values in Open Access data and data dissemination and preservation; map stakeholder values on to research ecosystems using case studies from different disciplinary perspectives; conduct a workshop to evaluate and identify good practice in addressing conflicting value chains and stakeholder fragmentation. This work was conducted within the EU FP7 funded project RECODE, which focuses on developing policy recommendations for Open Access to Research Data in Europe. Conducted desk research, case study interviews, and a validation workshop Measurement, Metrics, Wider
Subscribe to Knowledge: Other: Sensitive data