Advancing code sharing in the computational biology community.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Cadwallader L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9162310 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Advancing code sharing in the computational biology community.
Cadwallader Lauren L Mac Gabhann Feilim F Papin Jason J Pitzer Virginia E VE
PLoS computational biology 20220602 6
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8009435 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Open data science and algorithm development competitions offer a unique avenue for rapid discovery of better computational strategies. We highlight three examples in computational biology and bioinformatics research in which the use of competitions has yielded significant performance gains over established algorithms. These include algorithms for antibody clustering, imputing gene expression data, and querying the Connectivity Map (CMap). Performance gains are evaluated quantitatively using realistic, albeit sanitized, data sets. The solutions produced through these competitions are then examined with respect to their utility and the prospects for implementation in the field. We present the decision process and competition design considerations that lead to these successful outcomes as a model for researchers who want to use competitions and non-domain crowds as collaborators to further their research.
| S-EPMC6764653 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Data-driven computational analysis is becoming increasingly important in biomedical research, as the amount of data being generated continues to grow. However, the lack of practices of sharing research outputs, such as data, source code and methods, affects transparency and reproducibility of studies, which are critical to the advancement of science. Many published studies are not reproducible due to insufficient documentation, code, and data being shared. We conducted a comprehensive analysis of 453 manuscripts published between 2016-2021 and found that 50.1% of them fail to share the analytical code. Even among those that did disclose their code, a vast majority failed to offer additional research outputs, such as data. Furthermore, only one in ten articles organized their code in a structured and reproducible manner. We discovered a significant association between the presence of code availability statements and increased code availability. Additionally, a greater proportion of studies conducting secondary analyses were inclined to share their code compared to those conducting primary analyses. In light of our findings, we propose raising awareness of code sharing practices and taking immediate steps to enhance code availability to improve reproducibility in biomedical research. By increasing transparency and reproducibility, we can promote scientific rigor, encourage collaboration, and accelerate scientific discoveries. We must prioritize open science practices, including sharing code, data, and other research products, to ensure that biomedical research can be replicated and built upon by others in the scientific community.
| S-EPMC11232620 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Data-driven computational analysis is becoming increasingly important in biomedical research, as the amount of data being generated continues to grow. However, the lack of practices of sharing research outputs, such as data, source code and methods, affects transparency and reproducibility of studies, which are critical to the advancement of science. Many published studies are not reproducible due to insufficient documentation, code, and data being shared. We conducted a comprehensive analysis of 453 manuscripts published between 2016-2021 and found that 50.1% of them fail to share the analytical code. Even among those that did disclose their code, a vast majority failed to offer additional research outputs, such as data. Furthermore, only one in ten papers organized their code in a structured and reproducible manner. We discovered a significant association between the presence of code availability statements and increased code availability (p=2.71×10 -9 ). Additionally, a greater proportion of studies conducting secondary analyses were inclined to share their code compared to those conducting primary analyses (p=1.15*10 -07 ). In light of our findings, we propose raising awareness of code sharing practices and taking immediate steps to enhance code availability to improve reproducibility in biomedical research. By increasing transparency and reproducibility, we can promote scientific rigor, encourage collaboration, and accelerate scientific discoveries. We must prioritize open science practices, including sharing code, data, and other research products, to ensure that biomedical research can be replicated and built upon by others in the scientific community.
| S-EPMC10441317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vector-borne pathogens impact public health, animal production, and animal welfare. Research on arthropod vectors such as mosquitoes, ticks, sandflies, and midges which transmit pathogens to humans and economically important animals is crucial for development of new control measures that target transmission by the vector. While insecticides are an important part of this arsenal, appearance of resistance mechanisms is increasingly common. Novel tools for genetic manipulation of vectors, use of Wolbachia endosymbiotic bacteria, and other biological control mechanisms to prevent pathogen transmission have led to promising new intervention strategies, adding to strong interest in vector biology and genetics as well as vector-pathogen interactions. Vector research is therefore at a crucial juncture, and strategic decisions on future research directions and research infrastructure investment should be informed by the research community. A survey initiated by the European Horizon 2020 INFRAVEC-2 consortium set out to canvass priorities in the vector biology research community and to determine key activities that are needed for researchers to efficiently study vectors, vector-pathogen interactions, as well as access the structures and services that allow such activities to be carried out. We summarize the most important findings of the survey which in particular reflect the priorities of researchers in European countries, and which will be of use to stakeholders that include researchers, government, and research organizations.
| S-EPMC5072118 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Dockstore (https://dockstore.org/) is an open source platform for publishing, sharing, and finding bioinformatics tools and workflows. The platform has facilitated large-scale biomedical research collaborations by using cloud technologies to increase the Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability (FAIR) of computational resources, thereby promoting the reproducibility of complex bioinformatics analyses. Dockstore supports a variety of source repositories, analysis frameworks, and language technologies to provide a seamless publishing platform for authors to create a centralized catalogue of scientific software. The ready-to-use packaging of hundreds of tools and workflows, combined with the implementation of interoperability standards, enables users to launch analyses across multiple environments. Dockstore is widely used, more than twenty-five high-profile organizations share analysis collections through the platform in a variety of workflow languages, including the Broad Institute's GATK best practice and COVID-19 workflows (WDL), nf-core workflows (Nextflow), the Intergalactic Workflow Commission tools (Galaxy), and workflows from Seven Bridges (CWL) to highlight just a few. Here we describe the improvements made over the last four years, including the expansion of system integrations supporting authors, the addition of collaboration features and analysis platform integrations supporting users, and other enhancements that improve the overall scientific reproducibility of Dockstore content.
| S-EPMC8218198 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Making scientific analyses reproducible, well documented, and easily shareable is crucial to maximizing their impact and ensuring that others can build on them. However, accomplishing these goals is not easy, requiring careful attention to organization, workflow, and familiarity with tools that are not a regular part of every scientist's toolbox. We have developed an R package, workflowr, to help all scientists, regardless of background, overcome these challenges. Workflowr aims to instill a particular "workflow" - a sequence of steps to be repeated and integrated into research practice - that helps make projects more reproducible and accessible.This workflow integrates four key elements: (1) version control (via Git); (2) literate programming (via R Markdown); (3) automatic checks and safeguards that improve code reproducibility; and (4) sharing code and results via a browsable website. These features exploit powerful existing tools, whose mastery would take considerable study. However, the workflowr interface is simple enough that novice users can quickly enjoy its many benefits. By simply following the workflowr "workflow", R users can create projects whose results, figures, and development history are easily accessible on a static website - thereby conveniently shareable with collaborators by sending them a URL - and accompanied by source code and reproducibility safeguards. The workflowr R package is open source and available on CRAN, with full documentation and source code available at https://github.com/jdblischak/workflowr.
| S-EPMC6833990 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This research aimed to understand the needs and habits of researchers in relation to code sharing and reuse; gather feedback on prototype code notebooks created by NeuroLibre; and help determine strategies that publishers could use to increase code sharing. We surveyed 188 researchers in computational biology. Respondents were asked about how often and why they look at code, which methods of accessing code they find useful and why, what aspects of code sharing are important to them, and how satisfied they are with their ability to complete these tasks. Respondents were asked to look at a prototype code notebook and give feedback on its features. Respondents were also asked how much time they spent preparing code and if they would be willing to increase this to use a code sharing tool, such as a notebook. As a reader of research articles the most common reason (70%) for looking at code was to gain a better understanding of the article. The most commonly encountered method for code sharing-linking articles to a code repository-was also the most useful method of accessing code from the reader's perspective. As authors, the respondents were largely satisfied with their ability to carry out tasks related to code sharing. The most important of these tasks were ensuring that the code was running in the correct environment, and sharing code with good documentation. The average researcher, according to our results, is unwilling to incur additional costs (in time, effort or expenditure) that are currently needed to use code sharing tools alongside a publication. We infer this means we need different models for funding and producing interactive or executable research outputs if they are to reach a large number of researchers. For the purpose of increasing the amount of code shared by authors, PLOS Computational Biology is, as a result, focusing on policy rather than tools.
| S-EPMC9406794 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11386511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCommunity-based research inclusive of self-assessment and objective environmental metrics can be enhanced by the collection of biomarker data in unity toward assessing the health impacts of the totality of environmental stress driven by structural racism. Cortisol dynamic range (CDR), a measure of chronic stress burden, may underpin place-based connections to health, but a gap remains in elucidating community-based CDR methodology.PurposeTo 1) assess the feasibility of cortisol collection and CDR measurement in a community-based study with home-based, participant-directed specimen collection, and 2) explore the association between CDR and other individual and environmental measures in a sample of predominantly Black participants. Methods: In this cross-sectional, observational study in predominantly Black urban neighborhoods, participants (n = 73) completed health assessments and in-home, self-collected salivary cortisol. For feasibility, CDR (peak-nadir) was compared to cortisol awakening response (CAR) slope over time. Comparisons of CDR quartile by person and place variables were explored (ANOVA).ResultsThe cohort (77% Black, 39.7% <$15 k/year income, high perceived stress) completed 98.6% of cortisol collection timepoints. CDR was calculated in all participants without interruptions to sleep-wake cycle as seen with CAR collection. Participants in the lowest quartile of CDR were the oldest (p = 0.03) with lowest reported mental health (p = 0.048) with no associations seen for CAR.ConclusionParticipant-collected CDR is more feasible than cortisol measures dependent on slopes over time in a community-based, predominately Black cohort with exploratory findings supporting relevance to outcomes of interest to future work. Future community-based studies should integrate CDR with environment and psychosocial measures.
| S-EPMC9228000 | biostudies-literature