Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Missing Piece of the Puzzle: Neuroinformatics at the Bench

The Missing Piece of the Puzzle: Neuroinformatics at the Bench Neuroinform (2015) 13:131–132 DOI 10.1007/s12021-015-9268-3 EDITORIAL Erik De Schutter Published online: 9 April 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015 A recurring theme in our editorials has been the limited suc- made easier to use and find. But surprisingly little has been cess of data sharing in practice: too few neuroscientists share done to help motivated neuroscientists organize their data in 1 7 their data or models. A growing number of stakeholders have such a way that it is ready to be shared, despite the huge become concerned about promoting data sharing, as evi- opportunities for improvement. denced by a recent survey by a major publisher. To improve It is a sad fact that - although most scientific data is ac- data sharing, efforts have been made to encourage more sci- quired digitally - very few research laboratories in academic entists to contribute their data by giving them rewards, like the environments have adopted modern data management prac- citable data paper, or by contacting them personally based on tices. Though it may seem an improvement to the scientist publications listing suitable data and publicly listing both involved, there is really not much difference between having available and unavailable data, http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Neuroinformatics Springer Journals

The Missing Piece of the Puzzle: Neuroinformatics at the Bench

Schutter, Erik
Neuroinformatics , Volume 13 (2) – Apr 9, 2015
Download PDF
2 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/the-missing-piece-of-the-puzzle-neuroinformatics-at-the-bench-MhSeWxbzcZ
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 by Springer Science+Business Media New York
Subject
Biomedicine; Neurosciences; Bioinformatics; Computational Biology/Bioinformatics; Computer Appl. in Life Sciences; Neurology
ISSN
1539-2791
eISSN
1559-0089
DOI
10.1007/s12021-015-9268-3
pmid
25854494
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Neuroinform (2015) 13:131–132 DOI 10.1007/s12021-015-9268-3 EDITORIAL Erik De Schutter Published online: 9 April 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015 A recurring theme in our editorials has been the limited suc- made easier to use and find. But surprisingly little has been cess of data sharing in practice: too few neuroscientists share done to help motivated neuroscientists organize their data in 1 7 their data or models. A growing number of stakeholders have such a way that it is ready to be shared, despite the huge become concerned about promoting data sharing, as evi- opportunities for improvement. denced by a recent survey by a major publisher. To improve It is a sad fact that - although most scientific data is ac- data sharing, efforts have been made to encourage more sci- quired digitally - very few research laboratories in academic entists to contribute their data by giving them rewards, like the environments have adopted modern data management prac- citable data paper, or by contacting them personally based on tices. Though it may seem an improvement to the scientist publications listing suitable data and publicly listing both involved, there is really not much difference between having available and unavailable data,

Journal

Neuroinformatics – Springer Journals

Published: Apr 9, 2015

There are no references for this article.