Latest Articles Include:
- Standard cooperating procedures
- Nat Med 43(6):501 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - The role of a bioresource research impact factor as an incentive to share human bioresources
- Nat Med 43(6):503-504 (2011)
Article preview View full access options Nature Genetics | Correspondence The role of a bioresource research impact factor as an incentive to share human bioresources * Anne Cambon-Thomsen1, 2 * Gudmundur A Thorisson3 * * Laurence Mabile1, 2 * for the BRIF workshop group4 * Affiliations * Corresponding authorJournal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Pages:503–504Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.831Published online26 May 2011 To the Editor: Numerous health research funding institutions have recently expressed their strong will to promote data sharing1 (http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/publichealthdata). As under-lined in a recent editorial in Nature Medicine, an operational approach is needed to achieve this goal2. Bioresources such as biobanks, databases and bioinformatics tools are important elements in this landscape. Bioresources need to be easily accessible to facilitate advancement of research. Besides technical and ethical aspects, a major obstacle for sharing them is the absence of recognition of the effort behind establishing and maintaining such resources. The main objective of proposing a Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF) is to promote the sharing of bioresources by creating a link between their initiators or implementers and the impact of the scientific research using them3. A BRIF would make it possible to trace the quantitative use of a bioresource, the kind of research using it and the efforts o! f the people and institutions that construct it and make it available. In the context of EU projects, a BRIF working group has been set up, including 101 participants so far (http://www.gen2phen.org/groups/brif-bio-resource-impact-factor). The work involves several steps: creating a unique identifier, standardizing bioresource acknowledgment in papers, cataloging bioresource data access and sharing policies, identifying other parameters to take into account, and prototype testing with the help of volunteer bioresources and journal editors. The first BRIF workshop was held in Toulouse, France (January 17–18, 2011), gathering 34 people from ten countries and representing various domains: biobanks, genome databases, epidemiological longitudinal cohorts, bioinformatics, scientific publishing, bibliometry, health law and bioethics (http://precedings.nature.com/collections/brif-workshop-january-2011). The lack of objective measures for the use of bioresources was recognized by all; we focused on shared aims but underlined that each community had specific aspects to consider and resolve. Bioresources need to be identified by a unique digital identifier (ID), ideally through existing mechanisms4. Digital object identifiers (DOIs) may be interesting (http://www.doi.org/). Several issues must be considered, including what to identify (biobank, collection, database, dataset, subset and version), identifier requirements (persistent over time, globally unique, citable) and which international and independent body should be responsible for assigning bioresource IDs. Working subgroups were created to address those questions. Attribution of credit to scientists for different kinds of work (in addition to publications) using researcher IDs was also discussed. The ORCID initiative (http://www.orcid.org/) is building a new contributor ID framework which should, in principle, enable credit to be given to both bioresources and individuals involved in their creation and maintenance. Standardization of citation is necessary but could be combined with existing referencing standards and conventions5, such as citing marker papers, standardized sentences in the materials and methods or acknowledgments sections of papers, co-authorship when justified and including the resource name in the paper title. Specific requirements for citing bioresources are lacking in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html, version April 2010) and should be added. In order to enable automated tracking of bioresource use, the bioresource ID should ideally appear in or under the abstract section in order to be visible even without access to the full text of articles. BRIF should not be a citation index only. Factors such as time and domain of bioresources need to be considered in the calculation process and its weighting. Although the BRIF scope could be extended to measure many different aspects of bioresource utilization, including economic implications, it was decided to concentrate first on use and impact in research settings. Access and sharing policies have been developed over the years6. However, the incentivization of bioresources to promote access needs to be balanced with appropriate provisions compatible with all stakeholder interests, that is, proper recognition of scientific contribution and sustainability supported by the capacity for measuring their own resource use and impact. There are no mechanisms in place to measure this impact. Empowering bioresources with tools such as BRIF is therefore urgent. The full impact of bioresources is wider than BRIF, but unique bioresource identifiers and metrics must be established as the first operational step. The present proliferation of ideas, statements and proposals around data sharing from different perspectives and stakeholders1, 2, 3, 7 favors the implementation of tools such as BRIF in order to make data sharing principles operational. Workshop participants and members of the working group urge concerned stakeholders to join our efforts in developing such an instrument. Article preview Read the full article * Instant access to this article: US$18 Buy now * Subscribe to Nature Genetics for full access: Subscribe * Personal subscribers: Log in Additional access options: * Login via Athens * Login via your Institution * Purchase a site license * Use a document delivery service * British Library Document Supply Centre * Infotrieve * Thompson ISI Document Delivery * You can also request this document from your local library through inter-library loan services. Author information Article tools * Full text * Print * Email * Download PDF * Download citation * Order reprints * Rights and permissions * Share/bookmark * Connotea * CiteULike * Facebook * Twitter * Delicious * Digg Affiliations * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Gudmundur A Thorisson * A full list of members appears at the end of the paper. * the BRIF workshop group * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Center for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain. * Gabrielle Bertier * University of Amsterdam, Department of Philosophy, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. * Martin Boeckhout * Australian Breast Cancer Tissue Bank, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. * Jane Carpenter * Inserm, Public Health Institute, Paris, France. * Georges Dagher * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Raymond Dalgleish & * Gudmundur A Thorisson * P3G, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Mylène Deschênes * 3C-R, Toulouse, France. * Jeanne Hélène di Donato * Laboratorio Diagnosi Pre-Postnatale Malattie Metaboliche, Istituto G. Gaslini, G. Gaslini Institute, Genova, Italy. * Mirella Filocamo * Inserm U1018, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, Villejuif, France. * Marcel Goldberg, * Francine Kauffmann & * Marie Zins * Versailles-Saint Quentin University, UMRS 1018, Versailles, France. * Marcel Goldberg & * Marie Zins * European, Middle Eastern and African Society for Biopreservation and Biobanking (ESBB), Aix en Provence, France. * Robert Hewitt * Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Pathology & Human Biobank, Pasteur Hospital, University of Nice Sophia, Nice, France. * Paul Hofman * Paris Sud University, UMRS 1018, Villejuif, France. * Francine Kauffmann * Estonian Genome Center, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Liis Leitsalu & * Andres Metspalu * Laboratorio ImmunoBiología Molecular, Spanish HIV HGM BioBank, Madrid, Spain. * Irene Lomba * Department of Medical Genetics, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary. * Bela Melegh * Estonian Genome Center, Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Estonian Biocentre, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Biobusiness Consulting, Inc., Lowell, Massachusetts, USA. * Lisa Miranda * Istituto Superiore di Sanita, Rome, Italy. * Federica Napolitani * World Health Organization, Department of Health Statistics & Informatics, Geneva, Switzerland. * Mikkel Z Oestergaard * National Institute for Cancer Research, Genoa, Italy. * Barbara Parodi * International Prevention Research Institute, Lyon, France. * Markus Pasterk * Fundació IMIM, Barcelona, Spain. * Acacia Reiche * Thomson Reuters, Toulouse, France. * Guillaume Rivalle * Claudius Regaud Institute, Toulouse, France. * Philippe Rochaix * Biomed Central, London, UK. * Guillaume Susbielle * Latvian Biomedical Research and Study Center, Genome Database of Latvian Population [LGDB], Riga, Latvia. * Linda Tarasova * McGill University, Centre of Genomics and Policy, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Ma'n H Zawati Consortia * the BRIF workshop group * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Laurence Mabile * * Named collaborators * Sandrine Andrieu, * Gabrielle Bertier, * Martin Boeckhout, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Jane Carpenter, * Georges Dagher, * Raymond Dalgleish, * Mylène Deschênes, * Jeanne Hélène di Donato, * Mirella Filocamo, * Marcel Goldberg, * Robert Hewitt, * Paul Hofman, * Francine Kauffmann, * Liis Leitsalu, * Irene Lomba, * Laurence Mabile, * Bela Melegh, * Andres Metspalu, * Lisa Miranda, * Federica Napolitani, * Mikkel Z Oestergaard, * Barbara Parodi, * Markus Pasterk, * Acacia Reiche, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag, * Guillaume Rivalle, * Philippe Rochaix, * Guillaume Susbielle, * Linda Tarasova, * Mogens Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Ma'n H Zawati & * Marie Zins Competing financial interests The authors declare no competing financial interests. Corresponding author Correspondence to: * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Author Details * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Gudmundur A Thorisson Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Laurence Mabile Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar Additional data - SOX2 and CHD7 cooperatively regulate human disease genes
- Nat Med 43(6):505-506 (2011)
Article preview View full access options Nature Genetics | Correspondence The role of a bioresource research impact factor as an incentive to share human bioresources * Anne Cambon-Thomsen1, 2 * Gudmundur A Thorisson3 * * Laurence Mabile1, 2 * for the BRIF workshop group4 * Affiliations * Corresponding authorJournal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Pages:503–504Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.831Published online26 May 2011 To the Editor: Numerous health research funding institutions have recently expressed their strong will to promote data sharing1 (http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/publichealthdata). As under-lined in a recent editorial in Nature Medicine, an operational approach is needed to achieve this goal2. Bioresources such as biobanks, databases and bioinformatics tools are important elements in this landscape. Bioresources need to be easily accessible to facilitate advancement of research. Besides technical and ethical aspects, a major obstacle for sharing them is the absence of recognition of the effort behind establishing and maintaining such resources. The main objective of proposing a Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF) is to promote the sharing of bioresources by creating a link between their initiators or implementers and the impact of the scientific research using them3. A BRIF would make it possible to trace the quantitative use of a bioresource, the kind of research using it and the efforts o! f the people and institutions that construct it and make it available. In the context of EU projects, a BRIF working group has been set up, including 101 participants so far (http://www.gen2phen.org/groups/brif-bio-resource-impact-factor). The work involves several steps: creating a unique identifier, standardizing bioresource acknowledgment in papers, cataloging bioresource data access and sharing policies, identifying other parameters to take into account, and prototype testing with the help of volunteer bioresources and journal editors. The first BRIF workshop was held in Toulouse, France (January 17–18, 2011), gathering 34 people from ten countries and representing various domains: biobanks, genome databases, epidemiological longitudinal cohorts, bioinformatics, scientific publishing, bibliometry, health law and bioethics (http://precedings.nature.com/collections/brif-workshop-january-2011). The lack of objective measures for the use of bioresources was recognized by all; we focused on shared aims but underlined that each community had specific aspects to consider and resolve. Bioresources need to be identified by a unique digital identifier (ID), ideally through existing mechanisms4. Digital object identifiers (DOIs) may be interesting (http://www.doi.org/). Several issues must be considered, including what to identify (biobank, collection, database, dataset, subset and version), identifier requirements (persistent over time, globally unique, citable) and which international and independent body should be responsible for assigning bioresource IDs. Working subgroups were created to address those questions. Attribution of credit to scientists for different kinds of work (in addition to publications) using researcher IDs was also discussed. The ORCID initiative (http://www.orcid.org/) is building a new contributor ID framework which should, in principle, enable credit to be given to both bioresources and individuals involved in their creation and maintenance. Standardization of citation is necessary but could be combined with existing referencing standards and conventions5, such as citing marker papers, standardized sentences in the materials and methods or acknowledgments sections of papers, co-authorship when justified and including the resource name in the paper title. Specific requirements for citing bioresources are lacking in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html, version April 2010) and should be added. In order to enable automated tracking of bioresource use, the bioresource ID should ideally appear in or under the abstract section in order to be visible even without access to the full text of articles. BRIF should not be a citation index only. Factors such as time and domain of bioresources need to be considered in the calculation process and its weighting. Although the BRIF scope could be extended to measure many different aspects of bioresource utilization, including economic implications, it was decided to concentrate first on use and impact in research settings. Access and sharing policies have been developed over the years6. However, the incentivization of bioresources to promote access needs to be balanced with appropriate provisions compatible with all stakeholder interests, that is, proper recognition of scientific contribution and sustainability supported by the capacity for measuring their own resource use and impact. There are no mechanisms in place to measure this impact. Empowering bioresources with tools such as BRIF is therefore urgent. The full impact of bioresources is wider than BRIF, but unique bioresource identifiers and metrics must be established as the first operational step. The present proliferation of ideas, statements and proposals around data sharing from different perspectives and stakeholders1, 2, 3, 7 favors the implementation of tools such as BRIF in order to make data sharing principles operational. Workshop participants and members of the working group urge concerned stakeholders to join our efforts in developing such an instrument. Article preview Read the full article * Instant access to this article: US$18 Buy now * Subscribe to Nature Genetics for full access: Subscribe * Personal subscribers: Log in Additional access options: * Login via Athens * Login via your Institution * Purchase a site license * Use a document delivery service * British Library Document Supply Centre * Infotrieve * Thompson ISI Document Delivery * You can also request this document from your local library through inter-library loan services. Author information Article tools * Full text * Print * Email * Download PDF * Download citation * Order reprints * Rights and permissions * Share/bookmark * Connotea * CiteULike * Facebook * Twitter * Delicious * Digg Affiliations * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Gudmundur A Thorisson * A full list of members appears at the end of the paper. * the BRIF workshop group * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Center for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain. * Gabrielle Bertier * University of Amsterdam, Department of Philosophy, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. * Martin Boeckhout * Australian Breast Cancer Tissue Bank, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. * Jane Carpenter * Inserm, Public Health Institute, Paris, France. * Georges Dagher * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Raymond Dalgleish & * Gudmundur A Thorisson * P3G, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Mylène Deschênes * 3C-R, Toulouse, France. * Jeanne Hélène di Donato * Laboratorio Diagnosi Pre-Postnatale Malattie Metaboliche, Istituto G. Gaslini, G. Gaslini Institute, Genova, Italy. * Mirella Filocamo * Inserm U1018, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, Villejuif, France. * Marcel Goldberg, * Francine Kauffmann & * Marie Zins * Versailles-Saint Quentin University, UMRS 1018, Versailles, France. * Marcel Goldberg & * Marie Zins * European, Middle Eastern and African Society for Biopreservation and Biobanking (ESBB), Aix en Provence, France. * Robert Hewitt * Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Pathology & Human Biobank, Pasteur Hospital, University of Nice Sophia, Nice, France. * Paul Hofman * Paris Sud University, UMRS 1018, Villejuif, France. * Francine Kauffmann * Estonian Genome Center, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Liis Leitsalu & * Andres Metspalu * Laboratorio ImmunoBiología Molecular, Spanish HIV HGM BioBank, Madrid, Spain. * Irene Lomba * Department of Medical Genetics, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary. * Bela Melegh * Estonian Genome Center, Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Estonian Biocentre, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Biobusiness Consulting, Inc., Lowell, Massachusetts, USA. * Lisa Miranda * Istituto Superiore di Sanita, Rome, Italy. * Federica Napolitani * World Health Organization, Department of Health Statistics & Informatics, Geneva, Switzerland. * Mikkel Z Oestergaard * National Institute for Cancer Research, Genoa, Italy. * Barbara Parodi * International Prevention Research Institute, Lyon, France. * Markus Pasterk * Fundació IMIM, Barcelona, Spain. * Acacia Reiche * Thomson Reuters, Toulouse, France. * Guillaume Rivalle * Claudius Regaud Institute, Toulouse, France. * Philippe Rochaix * Biomed Central, London, UK. * Guillaume Susbielle * Latvian Biomedical Research and Study Center, Genome Database of Latvian Population [LGDB], Riga, Latvia. * Linda Tarasova * McGill University, Centre of Genomics and Policy, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Ma'n H Zawati Consortia * the BRIF workshop group * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Laurence Mabile * * Named collaborators * Sandrine Andrieu, * Gabrielle Bertier, * Martin Boeckhout, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Jane Carpenter, * Georges Dagher, * Raymond Dalgleish, * Mylène Deschênes, * Jeanne Hélène di Donato, * Mirella Filocamo, * Marcel Goldberg, * Robert Hewitt, * Paul Hofman, * Francine Kauffmann, * Liis Leitsalu, * Irene Lomba, * Laurence Mabile, * Bela Melegh, * Andres Metspalu, * Lisa Miranda, * Federica Napolitani, * Mikkel Z Oestergaard, * Barbara Parodi, * Markus Pasterk, * Acacia Reiche, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag, * Guillaume Rivalle, * Philippe Rochaix, * Guillaume Susbielle, * Linda Tarasova, * Mogens Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Ma'n H Zawati & * Marie Zins Competing financial interests The authors declare no competing financial interests. Corresponding author Correspondence to: * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Author Details * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Gudmundur A Thorisson Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Laurence Mabile Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar Additional data - Conducting the metabolic syndrome orchestra
- Nat Med 43(6):506-508 (2011)
Article preview View full access options Nature Genetics | Correspondence The role of a bioresource research impact factor as an incentive to share human bioresources * Anne Cambon-Thomsen1, 2 * Gudmundur A Thorisson3 * * Laurence Mabile1, 2 * for the BRIF workshop group4 * Affiliations * Corresponding authorJournal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Pages:503–504Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.831Published online26 May 2011 To the Editor: Numerous health research funding institutions have recently expressed their strong will to promote data sharing1 (http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/publichealthdata). As under-lined in a recent editorial in Nature Medicine, an operational approach is needed to achieve this goal2. Bioresources such as biobanks, databases and bioinformatics tools are important elements in this landscape. Bioresources need to be easily accessible to facilitate advancement of research. Besides technical and ethical aspects, a major obstacle for sharing them is the absence of recognition of the effort behind establishing and maintaining such resources. The main objective of proposing a Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF) is to promote the sharing of bioresources by creating a link between their initiators or implementers and the impact of the scientific research using them3. A BRIF would make it possible to trace the quantitative use of a bioresource, the kind of research using it and the efforts o! f the people and institutions that construct it and make it available. In the context of EU projects, a BRIF working group has been set up, including 101 participants so far (http://www.gen2phen.org/groups/brif-bio-resource-impact-factor). The work involves several steps: creating a unique identifier, standardizing bioresource acknowledgment in papers, cataloging bioresource data access and sharing policies, identifying other parameters to take into account, and prototype testing with the help of volunteer bioresources and journal editors. The first BRIF workshop was held in Toulouse, France (January 17–18, 2011), gathering 34 people from ten countries and representing various domains: biobanks, genome databases, epidemiological longitudinal cohorts, bioinformatics, scientific publishing, bibliometry, health law and bioethics (http://precedings.nature.com/collections/brif-workshop-january-2011). The lack of objective measures for the use of bioresources was recognized by all; we focused on shared aims but underlined that each community had specific aspects to consider and resolve. Bioresources need to be identified by a unique digital identifier (ID), ideally through existing mechanisms4. Digital object identifiers (DOIs) may be interesting (http://www.doi.org/). Several issues must be considered, including what to identify (biobank, collection, database, dataset, subset and version), identifier requirements (persistent over time, globally unique, citable) and which international and independent body should be responsible for assigning bioresource IDs. Working subgroups were created to address those questions. Attribution of credit to scientists for different kinds of work (in addition to publications) using researcher IDs was also discussed. The ORCID initiative (http://www.orcid.org/) is building a new contributor ID framework which should, in principle, enable credit to be given to both bioresources and individuals involved in their creation and maintenance. Standardization of citation is necessary but could be combined with existing referencing standards and conventions5, such as citing marker papers, standardized sentences in the materials and methods or acknowledgments sections of papers, co-authorship when justified and including the resource name in the paper title. Specific requirements for citing bioresources are lacking in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html, version April 2010) and should be added. In order to enable automated tracking of bioresource use, the bioresource ID should ideally appear in or under the abstract section in order to be visible even without access to the full text of articles. BRIF should not be a citation index only. Factors such as time and domain of bioresources need to be considered in the calculation process and its weighting. Although the BRIF scope could be extended to measure many different aspects of bioresource utilization, including economic implications, it was decided to concentrate first on use and impact in research settings. Access and sharing policies have been developed over the years6. However, the incentivization of bioresources to promote access needs to be balanced with appropriate provisions compatible with all stakeholder interests, that is, proper recognition of scientific contribution and sustainability supported by the capacity for measuring their own resource use and impact. There are no mechanisms in place to measure this impact. Empowering bioresources with tools such as BRIF is therefore urgent. The full impact of bioresources is wider than BRIF, but unique bioresource identifiers and metrics must be established as the first operational step. The present proliferation of ideas, statements and proposals around data sharing from different perspectives and stakeholders1, 2, 3, 7 favors the implementation of tools such as BRIF in order to make data sharing principles operational. Workshop participants and members of the working group urge concerned stakeholders to join our efforts in developing such an instrument. Article preview Read the full article * Instant access to this article: US$18 Buy now * Subscribe to Nature Genetics for full access: Subscribe * Personal subscribers: Log in Additional access options: * Login via Athens * Login via your Institution * Purchase a site license * Use a document delivery service * British Library Document Supply Centre * Infotrieve * Thompson ISI Document Delivery * You can also request this document from your local library through inter-library loan services. Author information Article tools * Full text * Print * Email * Download PDF * Download citation * Order reprints * Rights and permissions * Share/bookmark * Connotea * CiteULike * Facebook * Twitter * Delicious * Digg Affiliations * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Gudmundur A Thorisson * A full list of members appears at the end of the paper. * the BRIF workshop group * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Center for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain. * Gabrielle Bertier * University of Amsterdam, Department of Philosophy, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. * Martin Boeckhout * Australian Breast Cancer Tissue Bank, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. * Jane Carpenter * Inserm, Public Health Institute, Paris, France. * Georges Dagher * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Raymond Dalgleish & * Gudmundur A Thorisson * P3G, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Mylène Deschênes * 3C-R, Toulouse, France. * Jeanne Hélène di Donato * Laboratorio Diagnosi Pre-Postnatale Malattie Metaboliche, Istituto G. Gaslini, G. Gaslini Institute, Genova, Italy. * Mirella Filocamo * Inserm U1018, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, Villejuif, France. * Marcel Goldberg, * Francine Kauffmann & * Marie Zins * Versailles-Saint Quentin University, UMRS 1018, Versailles, France. * Marcel Goldberg & * Marie Zins * European, Middle Eastern and African Society for Biopreservation and Biobanking (ESBB), Aix en Provence, France. * Robert Hewitt * Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Pathology & Human Biobank, Pasteur Hospital, University of Nice Sophia, Nice, France. * Paul Hofman * Paris Sud University, UMRS 1018, Villejuif, France. * Francine Kauffmann * Estonian Genome Center, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Liis Leitsalu & * Andres Metspalu * Laboratorio ImmunoBiología Molecular, Spanish HIV HGM BioBank, Madrid, Spain. * Irene Lomba * Department of Medical Genetics, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary. * Bela Melegh * Estonian Genome Center, Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Estonian Biocentre, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Biobusiness Consulting, Inc., Lowell, Massachusetts, USA. * Lisa Miranda * Istituto Superiore di Sanita, Rome, Italy. * Federica Napolitani * World Health Organization, Department of Health Statistics & Informatics, Geneva, Switzerland. * Mikkel Z Oestergaard * National Institute for Cancer Research, Genoa, Italy. * Barbara Parodi * International Prevention Research Institute, Lyon, France. * Markus Pasterk * Fundació IMIM, Barcelona, Spain. * Acacia Reiche * Thomson Reuters, Toulouse, France. * Guillaume Rivalle * Claudius Regaud Institute, Toulouse, France. * Philippe Rochaix * Biomed Central, London, UK. * Guillaume Susbielle * Latvian Biomedical Research and Study Center, Genome Database of Latvian Population [LGDB], Riga, Latvia. * Linda Tarasova * McGill University, Centre of Genomics and Policy, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Ma'n H Zawati Consortia * the BRIF workshop group * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Laurence Mabile * * Named collaborators * Sandrine Andrieu, * Gabrielle Bertier, * Martin Boeckhout, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Jane Carpenter, * Georges Dagher, * Raymond Dalgleish, * Mylène Deschênes, * Jeanne Hélène di Donato, * Mirella Filocamo, * Marcel Goldberg, * Robert Hewitt, * Paul Hofman, * Francine Kauffmann, * Liis Leitsalu, * Irene Lomba, * Laurence Mabile, * Bela Melegh, * Andres Metspalu, * Lisa Miranda, * Federica Napolitani, * Mikkel Z Oestergaard, * Barbara Parodi, * Markus Pasterk, * Acacia Reiche, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag, * Guillaume Rivalle, * Philippe Rochaix, * Guillaume Susbielle, * Linda Tarasova, * Mogens Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Ma'n H Zawati & * Marie Zins Competing financial interests The authors declare no competing financial interests. Corresponding author Correspondence to: * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Author Details * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Gudmundur A Thorisson Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Laurence Mabile Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar Additional data - New modifier loci in cystic fibrosis
- Nat Med 43(6):508-509 (2011)
Article preview View full access options Nature Genetics | Correspondence The role of a bioresource research impact factor as an incentive to share human bioresources * Anne Cambon-Thomsen1, 2 * Gudmundur A Thorisson3 * * Laurence Mabile1, 2 * for the BRIF workshop group4 * Affiliations * Corresponding authorJournal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Pages:503–504Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.831Published online26 May 2011 To the Editor: Numerous health research funding institutions have recently expressed their strong will to promote data sharing1 (http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/publichealthdata). As under-lined in a recent editorial in Nature Medicine, an operational approach is needed to achieve this goal2. Bioresources such as biobanks, databases and bioinformatics tools are important elements in this landscape. Bioresources need to be easily accessible to facilitate advancement of research. Besides technical and ethical aspects, a major obstacle for sharing them is the absence of recognition of the effort behind establishing and maintaining such resources. The main objective of proposing a Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF) is to promote the sharing of bioresources by creating a link between their initiators or implementers and the impact of the scientific research using them3. A BRIF would make it possible to trace the quantitative use of a bioresource, the kind of research using it and the efforts o! f the people and institutions that construct it and make it available. In the context of EU projects, a BRIF working group has been set up, including 101 participants so far (http://www.gen2phen.org/groups/brif-bio-resource-impact-factor). The work involves several steps: creating a unique identifier, standardizing bioresource acknowledgment in papers, cataloging bioresource data access and sharing policies, identifying other parameters to take into account, and prototype testing with the help of volunteer bioresources and journal editors. The first BRIF workshop was held in Toulouse, France (January 17–18, 2011), gathering 34 people from ten countries and representing various domains: biobanks, genome databases, epidemiological longitudinal cohorts, bioinformatics, scientific publishing, bibliometry, health law and bioethics (http://precedings.nature.com/collections/brif-workshop-january-2011). The lack of objective measures for the use of bioresources was recognized by all; we focused on shared aims but underlined that each community had specific aspects to consider and resolve. Bioresources need to be identified by a unique digital identifier (ID), ideally through existing mechanisms4. Digital object identifiers (DOIs) may be interesting (http://www.doi.org/). Several issues must be considered, including what to identify (biobank, collection, database, dataset, subset and version), identifier requirements (persistent over time, globally unique, citable) and which international and independent body should be responsible for assigning bioresource IDs. Working subgroups were created to address those questions. Attribution of credit to scientists for different kinds of work (in addition to publications) using researcher IDs was also discussed. The ORCID initiative (http://www.orcid.org/) is building a new contributor ID framework which should, in principle, enable credit to be given to both bioresources and individuals involved in their creation and maintenance. Standardization of citation is necessary but could be combined with existing referencing standards and conventions5, such as citing marker papers, standardized sentences in the materials and methods or acknowledgments sections of papers, co-authorship when justified and including the resource name in the paper title. Specific requirements for citing bioresources are lacking in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html, version April 2010) and should be added. In order to enable automated tracking of bioresource use, the bioresource ID should ideally appear in or under the abstract section in order to be visible even without access to the full text of articles. BRIF should not be a citation index only. Factors such as time and domain of bioresources need to be considered in the calculation process and its weighting. Although the BRIF scope could be extended to measure many different aspects of bioresource utilization, including economic implications, it was decided to concentrate first on use and impact in research settings. Access and sharing policies have been developed over the years6. However, the incentivization of bioresources to promote access needs to be balanced with appropriate provisions compatible with all stakeholder interests, that is, proper recognition of scientific contribution and sustainability supported by the capacity for measuring their own resource use and impact. There are no mechanisms in place to measure this impact. Empowering bioresources with tools such as BRIF is therefore urgent. The full impact of bioresources is wider than BRIF, but unique bioresource identifiers and metrics must be established as the first operational step. The present proliferation of ideas, statements and proposals around data sharing from different perspectives and stakeholders1, 2, 3, 7 favors the implementation of tools such as BRIF in order to make data sharing principles operational. Workshop participants and members of the working group urge concerned stakeholders to join our efforts in developing such an instrument. Article preview Read the full article * Instant access to this article: US$18 Buy now * Subscribe to Nature Genetics for full access: Subscribe * Personal subscribers: Log in Additional access options: * Login via Athens * Login via your Institution * Purchase a site license * Use a document delivery service * British Library Document Supply Centre * Infotrieve * Thompson ISI Document Delivery * You can also request this document from your local library through inter-library loan services. Author information Article tools * Full text * Print * Email * Download PDF * Download citation * Order reprints * Rights and permissions * Share/bookmark * Connotea * CiteULike * Facebook * Twitter * Delicious * Digg Affiliations * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Gudmundur A Thorisson * A full list of members appears at the end of the paper. * the BRIF workshop group * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Center for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain. * Gabrielle Bertier * University of Amsterdam, Department of Philosophy, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. * Martin Boeckhout * Australian Breast Cancer Tissue Bank, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. * Jane Carpenter * Inserm, Public Health Institute, Paris, France. * Georges Dagher * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Raymond Dalgleish & * Gudmundur A Thorisson * P3G, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Mylène Deschênes * 3C-R, Toulouse, France. * Jeanne Hélène di Donato * Laboratorio Diagnosi Pre-Postnatale Malattie Metaboliche, Istituto G. Gaslini, G. Gaslini Institute, Genova, Italy. * Mirella Filocamo * Inserm U1018, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, Villejuif, France. * Marcel Goldberg, * Francine Kauffmann & * Marie Zins * Versailles-Saint Quentin University, UMRS 1018, Versailles, France. * Marcel Goldberg & * Marie Zins * European, Middle Eastern and African Society for Biopreservation and Biobanking (ESBB), Aix en Provence, France. * Robert Hewitt * Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Pathology & Human Biobank, Pasteur Hospital, University of Nice Sophia, Nice, France. * Paul Hofman * Paris Sud University, UMRS 1018, Villejuif, France. * Francine Kauffmann * Estonian Genome Center, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Liis Leitsalu & * Andres Metspalu * Laboratorio ImmunoBiología Molecular, Spanish HIV HGM BioBank, Madrid, Spain. * Irene Lomba * Department of Medical Genetics, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary. * Bela Melegh * Estonian Genome Center, Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Estonian Biocentre, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Biobusiness Consulting, Inc., Lowell, Massachusetts, USA. * Lisa Miranda * Istituto Superiore di Sanita, Rome, Italy. * Federica Napolitani * World Health Organization, Department of Health Statistics & Informatics, Geneva, Switzerland. * Mikkel Z Oestergaard * National Institute for Cancer Research, Genoa, Italy. * Barbara Parodi * International Prevention Research Institute, Lyon, France. * Markus Pasterk * Fundació IMIM, Barcelona, Spain. * Acacia Reiche * Thomson Reuters, Toulouse, France. * Guillaume Rivalle * Claudius Regaud Institute, Toulouse, France. * Philippe Rochaix * Biomed Central, London, UK. * Guillaume Susbielle * Latvian Biomedical Research and Study Center, Genome Database of Latvian Population [LGDB], Riga, Latvia. * Linda Tarasova * McGill University, Centre of Genomics and Policy, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Ma'n H Zawati Consortia * the BRIF workshop group * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Laurence Mabile * * Named collaborators * Sandrine Andrieu, * Gabrielle Bertier, * Martin Boeckhout, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Jane Carpenter, * Georges Dagher, * Raymond Dalgleish, * Mylène Deschênes, * Jeanne Hélène di Donato, * Mirella Filocamo, * Marcel Goldberg, * Robert Hewitt, * Paul Hofman, * Francine Kauffmann, * Liis Leitsalu, * Irene Lomba, * Laurence Mabile, * Bela Melegh, * Andres Metspalu, * Lisa Miranda, * Federica Napolitani, * Mikkel Z Oestergaard, * Barbara Parodi, * Markus Pasterk, * Acacia Reiche, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag, * Guillaume Rivalle, * Philippe Rochaix, * Guillaume Susbielle, * Linda Tarasova, * Mogens Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Ma'n H Zawati & * Marie Zins Competing financial interests The authors declare no competing financial interests. Corresponding author Correspondence to: * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Author Details * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Gudmundur A Thorisson Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Laurence Mabile Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar Additional data - Research highlights
- Nat Med 43(6):511 (2011)
Article preview View full access options Nature Genetics | Correspondence The role of a bioresource research impact factor as an incentive to share human bioresources * Anne Cambon-Thomsen1, 2 * Gudmundur A Thorisson3 * * Laurence Mabile1, 2 * for the BRIF workshop group4 * Affiliations * Corresponding authorJournal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Pages:503–504Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.831Published online26 May 2011 To the Editor: Numerous health research funding institutions have recently expressed their strong will to promote data sharing1 (http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/publichealthdata). As under-lined in a recent editorial in Nature Medicine, an operational approach is needed to achieve this goal2. Bioresources such as biobanks, databases and bioinformatics tools are important elements in this landscape. Bioresources need to be easily accessible to facilitate advancement of research. Besides technical and ethical aspects, a major obstacle for sharing them is the absence of recognition of the effort behind establishing and maintaining such resources. The main objective of proposing a Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF) is to promote the sharing of bioresources by creating a link between their initiators or implementers and the impact of the scientific research using them3. A BRIF would make it possible to trace the quantitative use of a bioresource, the kind of research using it and the efforts o! f the people and institutions that construct it and make it available. In the context of EU projects, a BRIF working group has been set up, including 101 participants so far (http://www.gen2phen.org/groups/brif-bio-resource-impact-factor). The work involves several steps: creating a unique identifier, standardizing bioresource acknowledgment in papers, cataloging bioresource data access and sharing policies, identifying other parameters to take into account, and prototype testing with the help of volunteer bioresources and journal editors. The first BRIF workshop was held in Toulouse, France (January 17–18, 2011), gathering 34 people from ten countries and representing various domains: biobanks, genome databases, epidemiological longitudinal cohorts, bioinformatics, scientific publishing, bibliometry, health law and bioethics (http://precedings.nature.com/collections/brif-workshop-january-2011). The lack of objective measures for the use of bioresources was recognized by all; we focused on shared aims but underlined that each community had specific aspects to consider and resolve. Bioresources need to be identified by a unique digital identifier (ID), ideally through existing mechanisms4. Digital object identifiers (DOIs) may be interesting (http://www.doi.org/). Several issues must be considered, including what to identify (biobank, collection, database, dataset, subset and version), identifier requirements (persistent over time, globally unique, citable) and which international and independent body should be responsible for assigning bioresource IDs. Working subgroups were created to address those questions. Attribution of credit to scientists for different kinds of work (in addition to publications) using researcher IDs was also discussed. The ORCID initiative (http://www.orcid.org/) is building a new contributor ID framework which should, in principle, enable credit to be given to both bioresources and individuals involved in their creation and maintenance. Standardization of citation is necessary but could be combined with existing referencing standards and conventions5, such as citing marker papers, standardized sentences in the materials and methods or acknowledgments sections of papers, co-authorship when justified and including the resource name in the paper title. Specific requirements for citing bioresources are lacking in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html, version April 2010) and should be added. In order to enable automated tracking of bioresource use, the bioresource ID should ideally appear in or under the abstract section in order to be visible even without access to the full text of articles. BRIF should not be a citation index only. Factors such as time and domain of bioresources need to be considered in the calculation process and its weighting. Although the BRIF scope could be extended to measure many different aspects of bioresource utilization, including economic implications, it was decided to concentrate first on use and impact in research settings. Access and sharing policies have been developed over the years6. However, the incentivization of bioresources to promote access needs to be balanced with appropriate provisions compatible with all stakeholder interests, that is, proper recognition of scientific contribution and sustainability supported by the capacity for measuring their own resource use and impact. There are no mechanisms in place to measure this impact. Empowering bioresources with tools such as BRIF is therefore urgent. The full impact of bioresources is wider than BRIF, but unique bioresource identifiers and metrics must be established as the first operational step. The present proliferation of ideas, statements and proposals around data sharing from different perspectives and stakeholders1, 2, 3, 7 favors the implementation of tools such as BRIF in order to make data sharing principles operational. Workshop participants and members of the working group urge concerned stakeholders to join our efforts in developing such an instrument. Article preview Read the full article * Instant access to this article: US$18 Buy now * Subscribe to Nature Genetics for full access: Subscribe * Personal subscribers: Log in Additional access options: * Login via Athens * Login via your Institution * Purchase a site license * Use a document delivery service * British Library Document Supply Centre * Infotrieve * Thompson ISI Document Delivery * You can also request this document from your local library through inter-library loan services. Author information Article tools * Full text * Print * Email * Download PDF * Download citation * Order reprints * Rights and permissions * Share/bookmark * Connotea * CiteULike * Facebook * Twitter * Delicious * Digg Affiliations * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Gudmundur A Thorisson * A full list of members appears at the end of the paper. * the BRIF workshop group * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Center for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain. * Gabrielle Bertier * University of Amsterdam, Department of Philosophy, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. * Martin Boeckhout * Australian Breast Cancer Tissue Bank, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. * Jane Carpenter * Inserm, Public Health Institute, Paris, France. * Georges Dagher * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Raymond Dalgleish & * Gudmundur A Thorisson * P3G, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Mylène Deschênes * 3C-R, Toulouse, France. * Jeanne Hélène di Donato * Laboratorio Diagnosi Pre-Postnatale Malattie Metaboliche, Istituto G. Gaslini, G. Gaslini Institute, Genova, Italy. * Mirella Filocamo * Inserm U1018, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, Villejuif, France. * Marcel Goldberg, * Francine Kauffmann & * Marie Zins * Versailles-Saint Quentin University, UMRS 1018, Versailles, France. * Marcel Goldberg & * Marie Zins * European, Middle Eastern and African Society for Biopreservation and Biobanking (ESBB), Aix en Provence, France. * Robert Hewitt * Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Pathology & Human Biobank, Pasteur Hospital, University of Nice Sophia, Nice, France. * Paul Hofman * Paris Sud University, UMRS 1018, Villejuif, France. * Francine Kauffmann * Estonian Genome Center, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Liis Leitsalu & * Andres Metspalu * Laboratorio ImmunoBiología Molecular, Spanish HIV HGM BioBank, Madrid, Spain. * Irene Lomba * Department of Medical Genetics, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary. * Bela Melegh * Estonian Genome Center, Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Estonian Biocentre, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Biobusiness Consulting, Inc., Lowell, Massachusetts, USA. * Lisa Miranda * Istituto Superiore di Sanita, Rome, Italy. * Federica Napolitani * World Health Organization, Department of Health Statistics & Informatics, Geneva, Switzerland. * Mikkel Z Oestergaard * National Institute for Cancer Research, Genoa, Italy. * Barbara Parodi * International Prevention Research Institute, Lyon, France. * Markus Pasterk * Fundació IMIM, Barcelona, Spain. * Acacia Reiche * Thomson Reuters, Toulouse, France. * Guillaume Rivalle * Claudius Regaud Institute, Toulouse, France. * Philippe Rochaix * Biomed Central, London, UK. * Guillaume Susbielle * Latvian Biomedical Research and Study Center, Genome Database of Latvian Population [LGDB], Riga, Latvia. * Linda Tarasova * McGill University, Centre of Genomics and Policy, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Ma'n H Zawati Consortia * the BRIF workshop group * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Laurence Mabile * * Named collaborators * Sandrine Andrieu, * Gabrielle Bertier, * Martin Boeckhout, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Jane Carpenter, * Georges Dagher, * Raymond Dalgleish, * Mylène Deschênes, * Jeanne Hélène di Donato, * Mirella Filocamo, * Marcel Goldberg, * Robert Hewitt, * Paul Hofman, * Francine Kauffmann, * Liis Leitsalu, * Irene Lomba, * Laurence Mabile, * Bela Melegh, * Andres Metspalu, * Lisa Miranda, * Federica Napolitani, * Mikkel Z Oestergaard, * Barbara Parodi, * Markus Pasterk, * Acacia Reiche, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag, * Guillaume Rivalle, * Philippe Rochaix, * Guillaume Susbielle, * Linda Tarasova, * Mogens Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Ma'n H Zawati & * Marie Zins Competing financial interests The authors declare no competing financial interests. Corresponding author Correspondence to: * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Author Details * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Gudmundur A Thorisson Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Laurence Mabile Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar Additional data - Principles for the post-GWAS functional characterization of cancer risk loci
- Nat Med 43(6):513-518 (2011)
Article preview View full access options Nature Genetics | Correspondence The role of a bioresource research impact factor as an incentive to share human bioresources * Anne Cambon-Thomsen1, 2 * Gudmundur A Thorisson3 * * Laurence Mabile1, 2 * for the BRIF workshop group4 * Affiliations * Corresponding authorJournal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Pages:503–504Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.831Published online26 May 2011 To the Editor: Numerous health research funding institutions have recently expressed their strong will to promote data sharing1 (http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/publichealthdata). As under-lined in a recent editorial in Nature Medicine, an operational approach is needed to achieve this goal2. Bioresources such as biobanks, databases and bioinformatics tools are important elements in this landscape. Bioresources need to be easily accessible to facilitate advancement of research. Besides technical and ethical aspects, a major obstacle for sharing them is the absence of recognition of the effort behind establishing and maintaining such resources. The main objective of proposing a Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF) is to promote the sharing of bioresources by creating a link between their initiators or implementers and the impact of the scientific research using them3. A BRIF would make it possible to trace the quantitative use of a bioresource, the kind of research using it and the efforts o! f the people and institutions that construct it and make it available. In the context of EU projects, a BRIF working group has been set up, including 101 participants so far (http://www.gen2phen.org/groups/brif-bio-resource-impact-factor). The work involves several steps: creating a unique identifier, standardizing bioresource acknowledgment in papers, cataloging bioresource data access and sharing policies, identifying other parameters to take into account, and prototype testing with the help of volunteer bioresources and journal editors. The first BRIF workshop was held in Toulouse, France (January 17–18, 2011), gathering 34 people from ten countries and representing various domains: biobanks, genome databases, epidemiological longitudinal cohorts, bioinformatics, scientific publishing, bibliometry, health law and bioethics (http://precedings.nature.com/collections/brif-workshop-january-2011). The lack of objective measures for the use of bioresources was recognized by all; we focused on shared aims but underlined that each community had specific aspects to consider and resolve. Bioresources need to be identified by a unique digital identifier (ID), ideally through existing mechanisms4. Digital object identifiers (DOIs) may be interesting (http://www.doi.org/). Several issues must be considered, including what to identify (biobank, collection, database, dataset, subset and version), identifier requirements (persistent over time, globally unique, citable) and which international and independent body should be responsible for assigning bioresource IDs. Working subgroups were created to address those questions. Attribution of credit to scientists for different kinds of work (in addition to publications) using researcher IDs was also discussed. The ORCID initiative (http://www.orcid.org/) is building a new contributor ID framework which should, in principle, enable credit to be given to both bioresources and individuals involved in their creation and maintenance. Standardization of citation is necessary but could be combined with existing referencing standards and conventions5, such as citing marker papers, standardized sentences in the materials and methods or acknowledgments sections of papers, co-authorship when justified and including the resource name in the paper title. Specific requirements for citing bioresources are lacking in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html, version April 2010) and should be added. In order to enable automated tracking of bioresource use, the bioresource ID should ideally appear in or under the abstract section in order to be visible even without access to the full text of articles. BRIF should not be a citation index only. Factors such as time and domain of bioresources need to be considered in the calculation process and its weighting. Although the BRIF scope could be extended to measure many different aspects of bioresource utilization, including economic implications, it was decided to concentrate first on use and impact in research settings. Access and sharing policies have been developed over the years6. However, the incentivization of bioresources to promote access needs to be balanced with appropriate provisions compatible with all stakeholder interests, that is, proper recognition of scientific contribution and sustainability supported by the capacity for measuring their own resource use and impact. There are no mechanisms in place to measure this impact. Empowering bioresources with tools such as BRIF is therefore urgent. The full impact of bioresources is wider than BRIF, but unique bioresource identifiers and metrics must be established as the first operational step. The present proliferation of ideas, statements and proposals around data sharing from different perspectives and stakeholders1, 2, 3, 7 favors the implementation of tools such as BRIF in order to make data sharing principles operational. Workshop participants and members of the working group urge concerned stakeholders to join our efforts in developing such an instrument. Article preview Read the full article * Instant access to this article: US$18 Buy now * Subscribe to Nature Genetics for full access: Subscribe * Personal subscribers: Log in Additional access options: * Login via Athens * Login via your Institution * Purchase a site license * Use a document delivery service * British Library Document Supply Centre * Infotrieve * Thompson ISI Document Delivery * You can also request this document from your local library through inter-library loan services. Author information Article tools * Full text * Print * Email * Download PDF * Download citation * Order reprints * Rights and permissions * Share/bookmark * Connotea * CiteULike * Facebook * Twitter * Delicious * Digg Affiliations * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Anne Cambon-Thomsen & * Laurence Mabile * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Gudmundur A Thorisson * A full list of members appears at the end of the paper. * the BRIF workshop group * Inserm, UMR1027, Epidemiology and Analyses in Public Health, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Université de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, UMR 1027, Toulouse, France. * Sandrine Andrieu, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Laurence Mabile, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag & * Mogens Thomsen * Center for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain. * Gabrielle Bertier * University of Amsterdam, Department of Philosophy, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. * Martin Boeckhout * Australian Breast Cancer Tissue Bank, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. * Jane Carpenter * Inserm, Public Health Institute, Paris, France. * Georges Dagher * Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. * Raymond Dalgleish & * Gudmundur A Thorisson * P3G, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Mylène Deschênes * 3C-R, Toulouse, France. * Jeanne Hélène di Donato * Laboratorio Diagnosi Pre-Postnatale Malattie Metaboliche, Istituto G. Gaslini, G. Gaslini Institute, Genova, Italy. * Mirella Filocamo * Inserm U1018, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, Villejuif, France. * Marcel Goldberg, * Francine Kauffmann & * Marie Zins * Versailles-Saint Quentin University, UMRS 1018, Versailles, France. * Marcel Goldberg & * Marie Zins * European, Middle Eastern and African Society for Biopreservation and Biobanking (ESBB), Aix en Provence, France. * Robert Hewitt * Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Pathology & Human Biobank, Pasteur Hospital, University of Nice Sophia, Nice, France. * Paul Hofman * Paris Sud University, UMRS 1018, Villejuif, France. * Francine Kauffmann * Estonian Genome Center, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Liis Leitsalu & * Andres Metspalu * Laboratorio ImmunoBiología Molecular, Spanish HIV HGM BioBank, Madrid, Spain. * Irene Lomba * Department of Medical Genetics, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary. * Bela Melegh * Estonian Genome Center, Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Estonian Biocentre, Tartu, Estonia. * Andres Metspalu * Biobusiness Consulting, Inc., Lowell, Massachusetts, USA. * Lisa Miranda * Istituto Superiore di Sanita, Rome, Italy. * Federica Napolitani * World Health Organization, Department of Health Statistics & Informatics, Geneva, Switzerland. * Mikkel Z Oestergaard * National Institute for Cancer Research, Genoa, Italy. * Barbara Parodi * International Prevention Research Institute, Lyon, France. * Markus Pasterk * Fundació IMIM, Barcelona, Spain. * Acacia Reiche * Thomson Reuters, Toulouse, France. * Guillaume Rivalle * Claudius Regaud Institute, Toulouse, France. * Philippe Rochaix * Biomed Central, London, UK. * Guillaume Susbielle * Latvian Biomedical Research and Study Center, Genome Database of Latvian Population [LGDB], Riga, Latvia. * Linda Tarasova * McGill University, Centre of Genomics and Policy, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. * Ma'n H Zawati Consortia * the BRIF workshop group * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Laurence Mabile * * Named collaborators * Sandrine Andrieu, * Gabrielle Bertier, * Martin Boeckhout, * Anne Cambon-Thomsen, * Jane Carpenter, * Georges Dagher, * Raymond Dalgleish, * Mylène Deschênes, * Jeanne Hélène di Donato, * Mirella Filocamo, * Marcel Goldberg, * Robert Hewitt, * Paul Hofman, * Francine Kauffmann, * Liis Leitsalu, * Irene Lomba, * Laurence Mabile, * Bela Melegh, * Andres Metspalu, * Lisa Miranda, * Federica Napolitani, * Mikkel Z Oestergaard, * Barbara Parodi, * Markus Pasterk, * Acacia Reiche, * Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag, * Guillaume Rivalle, * Philippe Rochaix, * Guillaume Susbielle, * Linda Tarasova, * Mogens Thomsen, * Gudmundur A Thorisson, * Ma'n H Zawati & * Marie Zins Competing financial interests The authors declare no competing financial interests. Corresponding author Correspondence to: * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Author Details * Anne Cambon-Thomsen Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Gudmundur A Thorisson Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar * Laurence Mabile Search for this author in: * NPG journals * PubMed * Google Scholar Additional data - Genome partitioning of genetic variation for complex traits using common SNPs
- Nat Med 43(6):519-525 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Mutations in CEP57 cause mosaic variegated aneuploidy syndrome
- Nat Med 43(6):527-529 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies identifies common variants associated with blood pressure variation in east Asians
- Nat Med 43(6):531-538 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Genome-wide association and linkage identify modifier loci of lung disease severity in cystic fibrosis at 11p13 and 20q13.2
- Nat Med 43(6):539-546 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Complex interactions between genes controlling trafficking in primary cilia
- Nat Med 43(6):547-553 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - General properties of transcriptional time series in Escherichia coli
- Nat Med 43(6):554-560 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Identification of an imprinted master trans regulator at the KLF14 locus related to multiple metabolic phenotypes
- Nat Med 43(6):561-564 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - A genome-wide association study of metabolic traits in human urine
- Nat Med 43(6):565-569 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Genome-wide association study of prostate cancer in men of African ancestry identifies a susceptibility locus at 17q21
- Nat Med 43(6):570-573 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Genome-wide association study identifies susceptibility loci for open angle glaucoma at TMCO1 and CDKN2B-AS1
- Nat Med 43(6):574-578 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Alteration of the serine protease PRSS56 causes angle-closure glaucoma in mice and posterior microphthalmia in humans and mice
- Nat Med 43(6):579-584 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Exome sequencing in sporadic autism spectrum disorders identifies severe de novo mutations
- Nat Med 43(6):585-589 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Recessive LAMC3 mutations cause malformations of occipital cortical development
- Nat Med 43(6):590-594 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Mutations in DNMT1 cause hereditary sensory neuropathy with dementia and hearing loss
- Nat Med 43(6):595-600 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - KIF7 mutations cause fetal hydrolethalus and acrocallosal syndromes
- Nat Med 43(6):601-606 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data - Sox2 cooperates with Chd7 to regulate genes that are mutated in human syndromes
- Nat Med 43(6):607-611 (2011)
Nature Genetics | Editorial Standard cooperating procedures Journal name:Nature GeneticsVolume: 43,Page:501Year published:(2011)DOI:doi:10.1038/ng.853Published online26 May 2011 Community review of proposed standards is a good strategy to broaden consensus on ways to conduct principled, ethical and efficient research. We are pleased to welcome new partners for our Nature Precedings Data Standards initiative and suggest other standards that could be usefully presented as citable preprints. View full text Additional data
No comments:
Post a Comment