↓ Skip to main content

Scientific and technical data sharing: a trading perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Scientific and technical data sharing: a trading perspective
Published in
Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design, August 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10822-014-9785-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeremy G. Frey, Colin L. Bird

Abstract

It is arguably a precept that the open sharing of data maximises the scientific utility of the research that generated that data. Indeed, progress depends on individual scientists being able to build on the results produced by others. The means to facilitate sharing undoubtedly exist, but various studies have identified reluctance among researchers to share information with their peers, at least until the professional priorities of the original researchers have been accommodated. With a view to encouraging less inhibited collaboration, we appraise the processes of data exchange from the perspective of a trading environment and consider how data exchanges might promote (or perhaps hinder) collaboration in data-rich scientific research disciplines and how such an exchange might be set up. We suggest an exchange with trusted brokers (akin to the commodity markets) as a way to overcome the challenges of the current environment. We conclude by encouraging the scientific and technical community to debate the merits of a trading perspective on data sharing and exchange.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
United States 1 4%
Unknown 21 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 26%
Librarian 3 13%
Student > Master 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 6 26%
Chemistry 4 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Other 6 26%
Unknown 3 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 October 2014.
All research outputs
#7,930,034
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#405
of 949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,837
of 243,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 243,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.