The sharing of research data facing the COVID-19 pandemic

The status of MRI databases across the world focused on psychiatric and neurological disorders

Neuroimaging databases for neuro-psychiatric disorders enable researchers to implement data-driven research approaches by providing access to rich data that can be used to study disease, build and validate machine learning models, and even redefine disease spectra. The importance of sharing large, multi-center, multi-disorder databases has gradually been recognized in order to truly translate brain imaging knowledge into real-world clinical practice. Here, we review MRI databases that share data globally to serve multiple psychiatric or neurological disorders. We found 42 datasets consisting of 23,293 samples from patients with psychiatry and neurological disorders and healthy controls; 1245 samples from mood disorders (major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder), 2015 samples from developmental disorders (autism spectrum disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder), 675 samples from schizophrenia, 1194 samples from Parkinson's disease, 5865 samples from dementia (including Alzheimer's disease), We recognize that large, multi-center databases should include governance processes that allow data to be shared across national boundaries. Addressing technical and regulatory issues of existing databases can lead to better design and implementation and improve data access for the research community. The current trend toward the development of shareable MRI databases will contribute to a better understanding of the pathophysiology, diagnosis and assessment, and development of early interventions for neuropsychiatric disorders.

Insights from ARCOS-V's Transition to Remote Data Collection during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Descriptive Study

INTRODUCTION

The ARCOS-V study, an epidemiological study on stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA), faced the challenge of continuing data collection amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to describe the methodological changes and challenges encountered during the transition from paper-based methods to digital data collection for the ARCOS-V study and to provide insights into the potential of using digital tools to transform epidemiological research.

METHODS

The study adapted to remote data collection using REDCap and Zoom, involving daily health record reviews, direct data entry by trained researchers, and remote follow-up assessments. The process was secured with encryption and role-based access controls. The transition period was analysed to evaluate the effectiveness and challenges of the new approach.

RESULTS

The digital transition allowed for uninterrupted monitoring of stroke and TIA cases during lockdowns. Using REDCap and Zoom improved data reach, accuracy, and security. However, it also revealed issues such as the potential for systematic data entry errors and the need for robust security measures to protect sensitive health information.

CONCLUSION

The ARCOS-V study's digital transformation exemplifies the resilience of epidemiological research in the face of a global crisis. The successful adaptation to digital data collection methods highlights the potential benefits of such tools, particularly as we enter a new age of artificial intelligence (AI).

Medical and molecular biophysical techniques as substantial tools in the era of mRNA-based vaccine technology

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted the advancement of vaccine technology using mRNA delivery into the host cells. Consequently, mRNA-based vaccines have emerged as a practical approach against SARS-CoV-2 owing to their inherent properties, such as cost-effectiveness, rapid manufacturing, and preservation. These features are vital, especially in resource-constrained regions. Nevertheless, the design of mRNA-based vaccines is intricately intertwined with the refinement of biophysical technologies, thereby establishing their high potential. The preparation of mRNA-based vaccines involves a sequence of phases combining medical and molecular biophysical technologies. Furthermore, their efficiency depends on the capability to optimize their positive attributes, thus paving the way for their subsequent preclinical and clinical evaluations. Using biophysical techniques, the characterization of nucleic acids extends from their initial formulation to their cellular internalization abilities and encapsulation in biomolecule complexes, such as lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), for designing mRNA-based LNPs. Furthermore, nanoparticles are subjected to a series of careful screening steps to assess their physical and chemical characteristics before achieving an optimum formulation suitable for preclinical and clinical studies. This review provides a comprehensive understanding of the fundamental role of biophysical techniques in the complex development of mRNA-based vaccines and their role in the recent success during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Cooperation in the Time of COVID

Humans evolved to be hyper-cooperative, particularly when among people who are well known to them, when relationships involve reciprocal helping opportunities, and when the costs to the helper are substantially less than the benefits to the recipient. Because humans' cooperative nature evolved over many millennia when they lived exclusively in small groups, factors that cause cooperation to break down tend to be those associated with life in large, impersonal, modern societies: when people are not identifiable, when interactions are one-off, when self-interest is not tied to the interests of others, and when people are concerned that others might free ride. From this perspective, it becomes clear that policies for managing pandemics will be most effective when they highlight superordinate goals and connect people or institutions to one another over multiple identifiable interactions. When forging such connections is not possible, policies should mimic critical components of ancestral conditions by providing reputational markers for cooperators and reducing the systemic damage caused by free riding. In this article, we review policies implemented during the pandemic, highlighting spontaneous community efforts that leveraged these aspects of people's evolved psychology, and consider implications for future decision makers.

The worsening divergence of biotechnology: the importance of risk culture

In the last 20 years, the field of biotechnology has made significant progress and attracted substantial investments, leading to different paths of technological modernization among nations. As a result, there is now an international divide in the commercial and intellectual capabilities of biotechnology, and the implications of this divergence are not well understood. This raises important questions about why global actors are motivated to participate in biotechnology modernization, the challenges they face in achieving their goals, and the possible future direction of global biotechnology development. Using the framework of prospect theory, this paper explores the role of risk culture as a fundamental factor contributing to this divergence. It aims to assess the risks and benefits associated with the early adoption of biotechnology and the regulatory frameworks that shape the development and acceptance of biotechnological innovations. By doing so, it provides valuable insights into the future of biotechnology development and its potential impact on the global landscape.

Pandemic scientific data sharing recommendations: examining and re-imagining pre-print servers after the end of the world-wide emergency

Early in the pandemic, pre-print servers sped rapid evidence sharing. A collaborative of major medical journals supported their use to ensure equitable access to scientific advancements. In the intervening three years, we have made major advancements in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 and learned about the benefits and limitations of pre-prints as a mechanism for sharing and disseminating scientific knowledge. Pre-prints increase attention, citations, and ultimately impact policy, often before findings are verified. Evidence suggests that pre-prints have more spin relative to peer-reviewed publications. Clinical trial findings posted on pre-print servers do not change substantially following peer-review, but other study types (e.g., modeling and observational studies) often undergo substantial revision or are never published. Nuanced policies about sharing results are needed to balance rapid implementation of true and important advancements with accuracy. Policies recommending immediate posting of COVID-19-related research should be re-evaluated, and standards for evaluation and sharing of unverified studies should be developed. These may include specifications about what information is included in pre-prints and requirements for certain data quality standards (e.g., automated review of images and tables); requirements for code release and sharing; and limiting early postings to methods, results, and limitations sections. Academic publishing needs to innovate and improve, but assessments of evidence quality remains a critical part of the scientific discovery and dissemination process.

Transparency of COVID-19-related research: A meta-research study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess the adherence to five transparency practices (data availability, code availability, protocol registration and conflicts of interest (COI), and funding disclosures) from open access Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related articles.

METHODS

We searched and exported all open access COVID-19-related articles from PubMed-indexed journals in the Europe PubMed Central database published from January 2020 to June 9, 2022. With a validated and automated tool, we detected transparent practices of three paper types: research articles, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and reviews. Basic journal- and article-related information were retrieved from the database. We used R for the descriptive analyses.

RESULTS

The total number of articles was 258,678, of which we were able to retrieve full texts of 186,157 (72%) articles from the database Over half of the papers (55.7%, n = 103,732) were research articles, 10.9% (n = 20,229) were review articles, and less than one percent (n = 1,202) were RCTs. Approximately nine-tenths of articles (in all three paper types) had a statement to disclose COI. Funding disclosure (83.9%, confidence interval (CI): 81.7-85.8 95%) and protocol registration (53.5%, 95% CI: 50.7-56.3) were more frequent in RCTs than in reviews or research articles. Reviews shared data (2.5%, 95% CI: 2.3-2.8) and code (0.4%, 95% CI: 0.4-0.5) less frequently than RCTs or research articles. Articles published in 2022 had the highest adherence to all five transparency practices. Most of the reviews (62%) and research articles (58%) adhered to two transparency practices, whereas almost half of the RCTs (47%) adhered to three practices. There were journal- and publisher-related differences in all five practices, and articles that did not adhere to transparency practices were more likely published in lowest impact journals and were less likely cited.

CONCLUSION

While most articles were freely available and had a COI disclosure, adherence to other transparent practices was far from acceptable. A much stronger commitment to open science practices, particularly to protocol registration, data and code sharing, is needed from all stakeholders.

Habits and perceptions regarding open science by researchers from Spanish institutions

The article describes the results of the online survey on open science (OS) carried out on researchers affiliated with universities and Spanish research centres and focused on open access to scientific publications, the publication process, the management of research data and the review of open articles. The main objective was to identify the perception and habits of researchers with regard to practices closely linked to open science and the scientific value added is that offers an in-depth picture of researchers as one of the main actors to whom this transformation and implementation of open science will fall. It focuses on the different aspects of OS: open access, open data, publication process and open review in order to identify habits and perceptions. This is to make possible an implementation of the OS movement. The survey was carried out among researchers who had published in the years 2020-2021, according to data obtained from WoS. It was emailed to a total of 8,188 researchers and obtained a total of 666 responses, of which 554 were complete, the rest being forms with some questions unanswered. The main results showed that open access still requires the diffusion of practices and services provided by the institution, as well as training (library or equivalent service) and institutional support from the competent authorities (vice rectors or equivalent) in specific aspects such as data management. In the case of data, around 50% of respondents stated they had stored data in a repository, and of all the options, the most frequently given was that of an institutional repository, followed by a discipline repository. Among the main reasons for doing this, we found transparency, visibility of data and the ability to validate results. For those who stated they had never stored data, the most frequent reasons for not having done so were privacy and confidentiality, the lack of a mandated data policy or a lack of knowledge of how to do it. In terms of open peer review, participants mentioned a certain reticence to the opening of evaluations due to potential conflicts of interest that may arise or because lower-quality content might be accepted in order to avoid conflicts. In addition, the hierarchical structure of senior researcher versus junior researcher might affect reviews. The main conclusions indicate a need for persuasion of OA to take place; APCs are an economic barrier rather than the main criterion for journal selection; OPR practices may seem innovative and emerging; scientific and evaluation policies seem to have a clear effect on the behaviour of researchers; researchers state that they share research data more for reasons of persuasion than out of obligation. Researchers do question the pathways or difficulties that may arise on a day-to-day basis and seem aware that we are undergoing change, where academic evaluation or policies related to open science, its implementation and habits among researchers may change. In this sense, more and better support is needed on the part of institutions and faculty support services.

North-south scientific collaborations on research datasets: a longitudinal analysis of the division of labor on genomic datasets (1992-2021)

Collaborations between scientists from the global north and global south (N-S collaborations) are a key driver of the "fourth paradigm of science" and have proven crucial to addressing global crises like COVID-19 and climate change. However, despite their critical role, N-S collaborations on datasets are not well understood. Science of science studies tend to rely on publications and patents to examine N-S collaboration patterns. To this end, the rise of global crises requiring N-S collaborations to produce and share data presents an urgent need to understand the prevalence, dynamics, and political economy of N-S collaborations on research datasets. In this paper, we employ a mixed methods case study research approach to analyze the frequency of and division of labor in N-S collaborations on datasets submitted to GenBank over 29 years (1992-2021). We find: (1) there is a low representation of N-S collaborations over the 29-year period. When they do occur, N-S collaborations display "burstiness" patterns, suggesting that N-S collaborations on datasets are formed and maintained reactively in the wake of global health crises such as infectious disease outbreaks; (2) The division of labor between datasets and publications is disproportionate to the global south in the early years, but becomes more overlapping after 2003. An exception in the case of countries with lower S&T capacity but high income, where these countries have a higher prevalence on datasets (e.g., United Arab Emirates). We qualitatively inspect a sample of N-S dataset collaborations to identify leadership patterns in dataset and publication authorship. The findings lead us to argue there is a need to include N-S dataset collaborations in measures of research outputs to nuance the current models and assessment tools of equity in N-S collaborations. The paper contributes to the SGDs objectives to develop data-driven metrics that can inform scientific collaborations on research datasets.

Exploring perspectives of research ethics committee members on the governance of big data in sub-Saharan Africa

Interest in the governance of big data is growing exponentially. However, finding the right balance between making large volumes of data accessible, and safeguarding privacy, preventing data misuse, determining authorship and protecting intellectual property remain challenging. In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), research ethics committees (RECs) play an important role in reviewing data-intense research protocols. However, this regulatory role must be embedded in a context of robust governance. There is currently a paucity of published literature on how big data are regulated in SSA and if the capacity to review protocols is sufficient. The aim of this study was to provide a broad overview of REC members' awareness and perceptions of big data governance in SSA. A descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted from April to July 2022. We invited 300 REC members to participate in our online survey via Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). A total of 140 REC members, representing 34 SSA countries, completed the online survey. Awareness of data governance laws, policies and guidelines was variable across the subcontinent. A quarter of respondents (25%) indicated that national regulations on the trans-border flow of research data are inadequate. Institutional policies on research data protection were also regarded as being inadequate. Most respondents (64%) believed that they lacked experience in reviewing data-intense protocols. Data governance and regulation in SSA need to be strengthened at both national and institutional levels. There is a strong need for capacity development in the review of data-intense research protocols on the subcontinent.

Web-tools for the genomic analysis of the 2022 Monkeypox virus global outbreak

The resources and platforms available on the internet for collect-ing and sharing information and performing genomic sequence analysis have made it possible to follow closely the evolution the evolution of SARS-CoV-2. However, the current monkeypox outbreak in the world brings us back to the need to use these resources to appraise the extent of this outbreak. The ob-jective of this work was an analysis of the information presented so far in the genomic database GISAID EpiPox™, using various tools available on the web. The results indicate that the monkeypox outbreak is referred as MPXV clade II B.1 lineage and sub-lineages, isolated from male patients mainly from the Euro-pean and American continents. In the current scenario, the access to genomic sequences, epidemiological information, and tools available to the scientific community is of great importance for global public health in order to follow the evolution of pathogens.

Digital health technology used in emergency large-scale vaccination campaigns in low- and middle-income countries: a narrative review for improved pandemic preparedness

INTRODUCTION

Large-scale vaccination campaigns can benefit from using digital health tools, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Selecting the best tool to fit into a pre-existing digital landscape can be challenging.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a narrative review in PubMed and the grey literature for data available within 5 years to provide an overview of digital health tools used in large-scale vaccination campaigns for outbreak response in LMICs. We discuss tools used along the typical steps of a vaccination process. Digital tool functionalities and technical specifications, open-source options, data privacy and security concerns, and lessons learned from the use of these tools are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

The landscape of digital health tools for large-scale vaccination processes in LMICs is growing. For efficient implementation, countries should prioritize the appropriate tool(s) depending on their needs and available resources, develop a robust framework around data privacy and security, and select sustainable features. Improving internet connectivity and digital literacy in LMICs will facilitate adoption. This review may aid LMICs still needing to prepare large-scale vaccination campaigns in the selection of supporting digital health tools. Further research on impact and cost-effectiveness is needed.

Data sharing governance in sub-Saharan Africa during public health emergencies: Gaps and guidance

While the COVID-19 pandemic has captured the attention of the global community since the end of 2019, deadly health pandemics are not new to Africa. Tuberculosis (TB), malaria and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) count amongst other serious diseases that have had a catastrophic impact on the African continent. Effective responses to such pandemics require high-quality, comprehensive data sets that can inform policymaking and enhance healthcare decision-making. While data is driving the information economy in the 21st century, the scarcity in Africa of carefully curated, large epidemiologic data sources and analytical capacity to rapidly identify and understand emerging infectious diseases poses a major challenge to mounting a time-sensitive response to unfolding pandemics. Data access, sharing and transfer between countries are crucial to effectively managing current and future health pandemics. Data access and sharing, however, raises questions about personal privacy, the adequacy of governance mechanisms to regulate cross-border data flows, and ethical issues relating to the collection and use of personal data in the interests of public health. Sub-Saharan Africa's most research-intensive countries are characterised by diverse data management and privacy governance frameworks. Such regional variance can impede time-sensitive data sharing and highlights the need for urgent governance reforms to facilitate effective decision-making in response to rapidly evolving public health threats.

Analysis of shared research data in Spanish scientific papers about COVID-19: A first approach

During the coronavirus pandemic, changes in the way science is done and shared occurred, which motivates meta-research to help understand science communication in crises and improve its effectiveness. The objective is to study how many Spanish scientific papers on COVID-19 published during 2020 share their research data. Qualitative and descriptive study applying nine attributes: (a) availability, (b) accessibility, (c) format, (d) licensing, (e) linkage, (f) funding, (g) editorial policy, (h) content, and (i) statistics. We analyzed 1,340 papers, 1,173 (87.5%) did not have research data. A total of 12.5% share their research data of which 2.1% share their data in repositories, 5% share their data through a simple request, 0.2% do not have permission to share their data, and 5.2% share their data as supplementary material. There is a small percentage that shares their research data; however, it demonstrates the researchers' poor knowledge on how to properly share their research data and their lack of knowledge on what is research data.

Standardizing, Harmonizing, and Protecting Data Collection to Broaden the Impact of COVID-19 Research: The Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics-Underserved Populations (RADx-up) Initiative

Objective

The Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics-Underserved Populations (RADx-UP) program is a consortium of community-engaged research projects with the goal of increasing access to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) tests in underserved populations. To accelerate clinical research, common data elements (CDEs) were selected and refined to standardize data collection and enhance cross-consortium analysis.

Materials and Methods

The RADx-UP consortium began with more than 700 CDEs from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) CDE Repository, Disaster Research Response (DR2) guidelines, and the PHENotypes and eXposures (PhenX) Toolkit. Following a review of initial CDEs, we made selections and further refinements through an iterative process that included live forums, consultations, and surveys completed by the first 69 RADx-UP projects.

Results

Following a multistep CDE development process, we decreased the number of CDEs, modified the question types, and changed the CDE wording. Most research projects were willing to collect and share demographic NIH Tier 1 CDEs, with the top exception reason being a lack of CDE applicability to the project. The NIH RADx-UP Tier 1 CDE with the lowest frequency of collection and sharing was sexual orientation.

Discussion

We engaged a wide range of projects and solicited bidirectional input to create CDEs. These RADx-UP CDEs could serve as the foundation for a patient-centered informatics architecture allowing the integration of disease-specific databases to support hypothesis-driven clinical research in underserved populations.

Conclusion

A community-engaged approach using bidirectional feedback can lead to the better development and implementation of CDEs in underserved populations during public health emergencies.

Transparency of COVID-19-Related Research in Dental Journals

Objective

We aimed to assess the adherence to transparency practices (data availability, code availability, statements of protocol registration and conflicts of interest and funding disclosures) and FAIRness (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) of shared data from open access COVID-19-related articles published in dental journals available from the Europe PubMed Central (PMC) database.

Methods

We searched and exported all COVID-19-related open-access articles from PubMed-indexed dental journals available in the Europe PMC database in 2020 and 2021. We detected transparency indicators with a validated and automated tool developed to extract the indicators from the downloaded articles. Basic journal- and article-related information was retrieved from the PMC database. Then, from those which had shared data, we assessed their accordance with FAIR data principles using the F-UJI online tool (f-uji.net).

Results

Of 650 available articles published in 59 dental journals, 74% provided conflicts of interest disclosure and 40% funding disclosure and 4% were preregistered. One study shared raw data (0.15%) and no study shared code. Transparent practices were more common in articles published in journals with higher impact factors, and in 2020 than in 2021. Adherence to the FAIR principles in the only paper that shared data was moderate.

Conclusion

While the majority of the papers had a COI disclosure, the prevalence of the other transparency practices was far from the acceptable level. A much stronger commitment to open science practices, particularly to preregistration, data and code sharing, is needed from all stakeholders.

Open data and data sharing in articles about COVID-19 published in preprint servers medRxiv and bioRxiv

This study aimed to analyze the content of data availability statements (DAS) and the actual sharing of raw data in preprint articles about COVID-19. The study combined a bibliometric analysis and a cross-sectional survey. We analyzed preprint articles on COVID-19 published on medRxiv and bioRxiv from January 1, 2020 to March 30, 2020. We extracted data sharing statements, tried to locate raw data when authors indicated they were available, and surveyed authors. The authors were surveyed in 2020–2021. We surveyed authors whose articles did not include DAS, who indicated that data are available on request, or their manuscript reported that raw data are available in the manuscript, but raw data were not found. Raw data collected in this study are published on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/6ztec/). We analyzed 897 preprint articles. There were 699 (78%) articles with Data/Code field present on the website of a preprint server. In 234 (26%) preprints, data/code sharing statement was reported within the manuscript. For 283 preprints that reported that data were accessible, we found raw data/code for 133 (47%) of those 283 preprints (15% of all analyzed preprint articles). Most commonly, authors indicated that data were available on GitHub or another clearly specified web location, on (reasonable) request, in the manuscript or its supplementary files. In conclusion, preprint servers should require authors to provide data sharing statements that will be included both on the website and in the manuscript. Education of researchers about the meaning of data sharing is needed.

Surveying research data-sharing practices in US social sciences: a knowledge infrastructure-inspired conceptual framework

Purpose

This study develops a conceptual framework and a series of instruments for capturing researchers' data-sharing practices in the social sciences, by synergizing the theory of knowledge infrastructure and the theory of remote scientific collaboration.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper triangulates the results of three studies of data sharing across the social sciences, with 144 participants in total, and classifies the confusion, “frictions” and opportunities arising from such sharing into four overarching dimensions: data characteristics, technological infrastructure, research culture and individual drivers.

Findings

Based on the sample, the findings suggest that the majority of faculty and students in social science research do not share their data because many of them are unaware of the benefits and methods of doing so. Additional findings regarding social scientists' data-sharing behaviors include: (1) those who do share qualitative data in data repositories are more likely to share their research tools than their raw data; and (2) perceived technical support and extrinsic motivation are both strong predictors of qualitative data sharing (a previously underresearched subtype of social science data sharing).

Originality/value

The study confirms the previously hypothesized nature of “friction” in qualitative data sharing in the social sciences, arising chiefly from the time and labor intensiveness of ensuring data privacy.

Peer review

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-03-2020-0079.

BIP4COVID19: Releasing impact measures for articles relevant to COVID-19

Since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic, a large number of relevant articles have been published or become available in preprint servers. These articles, along with earlier related literature, compose a valuable knowledge base affecting contemporary research studies or even government actions to limit the spread of the disease, and directing treatment decisions taken by physicians. However, the number of such articles is increasing at an intense rate, making the exploration of the relevant literature and the identification of useful knowledge challenging. In this work, we describe BIP4COVID19, an open data set that offers a variety of impact measures for coronavirus-related scientific articles. These measures can be exploited for the creation or extension of added-value services aiming to facilitate the exploration of the respective literature, alleviating the aforementioned issue. In the same context, as a use case, we provide a publicly accessible keyword-based search interface for COVID-19-related articles, which leverages our data to rank search results according to the calculated impact indicators.

Publisher Transparency among Communications and Library and Information Science Journals: Analysis and Recommendations

The principal goal of the research study is to analyze the transparency of a selection of academic journals based on an analysis model with 20 indicators grouped into 6 parameters. Given the evident interest in and commitment to transparency among quality academic journals and researchers’ difficulties in choosing journals that meet a set of criteria, we present indicators that may help researchers choose journals while also helping journals to consider what information from the editorial process to publish, or not, on their websites to attract authors in the highly competitive environment of today’s scholarly communication. To test the validity of the indicators, we analyze a small sample: the Spanish Communications and Library and Information Science journals listed in the Scimago Journal Rank. The results confirm that our analysis model is valid and can be extrapolated to other disciplines and journals.

GA4GH Passport standard for digital identity and access permissions

The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) supports international standards that enable a federated data sharing model for the research community while respecting data security, ethical and regulatory frameworks, and data authorization and access processes for sensitive data. The GA4GH Passport standard (Passport) defines a machine-readable digital identity that conveys roles and data access permissions (called "visas") for individual users. Visas are issued by data stewards, including data access committees (DACs) working with public databases, the entities responsible for the quality, integrity, and access arrangements for the datasets in the management of human biomedical data. Passports streamline management of data access rights across data systems by using visas that present a data user's digital identity and permissions across organizations, tools, environments, and services. We describe real-world implementations of the GA4GH Passport standard in use cases from ELIXIR Europe, National Institutes of Health, and the Autism Sharing Initiative. These implementations demonstrate that the Passport standard has provided transparent mechanisms for establishing permissions and authorizing data access across platforms.

Evidence Gaps and Challenges in the Fight Against COVID-19 in Africa: Scoping Review of the Ethiopian Experience

BACKGROUND

Ethiopia, like many African countries, took immediate actions to contain the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak and its impacts. However, the pandemic control measures were not guided by robust local evidence and not tailored to national contexts. In this review, we aimed to evaluate the evidence gaps and challenges of COVID-19 control measures in Ethiopia during the early months of the pandemic.

DESIGN

Scoping Review.

DATA SOURCE

Searches were conducted in PubMed, LitCovid, Web of Sciences, Embase, MedRx, ChemRxiv, BioRx, and Google Scholar.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Peer-reviewed or pre-print original research articles on COVID-19 from Ethiopia during a period of January 1, 2020 and October 10, 2020 were included in this review.

RESULTS

Of 573 articles found, 64 were eligible for inclusion. However, only 25 of them were peer-reviewed; 78% (50/64) were based on cross-sectional descriptive studies. Most of the studies focused on human behavior and healthcare system; only 13 articles addressed epidemiology and clinical spectrum of COVID-19. The studies have revealed a good level of awareness and a favorable attitude by community and healthcare workers (HCWs) towards COVID-19 and its control. However, the practices of infection prevention were found to be low among HCWs and the community. The outbreak unfolded at a slower rate than initially feared but the impact of the counter measures against COVID-19 on the delivery of essential healthcare services was felt more than the direct impact of the pandemic. Moreover, the actions taken by the country did not appear to be tailored to the pattern of the outbreak and existing local evidence. The overall number of published COVID-19-related scientific articles from Ethiopia during the review period was found to be limited.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 control in Ethiopia was challenged by lack of robust local scientific evidence, and the pandemic control measures were not adapted to local context and the outbreak patterns. Thus, Ethiopia and other African countries should design culturally sensitive and locally acceptable public health interventions for COVID-19 and potential future outbreaks based on locally generated scientific evidence.