Search

Reproducibility is a basis of scientific integrity, yet it remains a significant challenge across disciplines in computational science. This reproducibility crisis is now being met with an Open Science movement, which has risen to prominence within the scientific community and academic libraries especially. To address the need for reproducible computational research and promote Open Science within the community, members of the Open Science and Data Collaborations Program at Carnegie Mellon University Libraries organized a single-day hackathon centered around reproducibility. Partnering with a faculty researcher in English and Digital Humanities, this event allowed several students an opportunity to interact with real research outputs, test the reproducibility of data analyses with code, and offer feedback for improvements. With Python code and data shared by the researcher in an open repository, we revealed that students could successfully reproduce most of the data visualizations, but they required completing some manual setup and modifications to address depreciated libraries to successfully rerun the code. During the event, we also investigated the option of using ChatGPT to debug and troubleshoot rerunning this code. By interacting with a ChatGPT API in the code, we found and addressed the same roadblocks and successfully reproduced the same figures as the participating students. Assessing a second option, we also collaborated with the researcher to publish a compute capsule in Code Ocean. This option presented an alternative to manual setup and modifications, an accessible option for more limited devices like tablets, and a simple solution for outside researchers to modify or build on existing research code.

As research becomes more interdisciplinary, fast-paced, data-intensive, and collaborative, there is an increasing need to share data and other research products in accordance with Open Science principles. In response to this need, we created an Open Science & Data Collaborations (OSDC) program at the Carnegie Mellon University Libraries that provides Open Science tools, training, collaboration opportunities, and community-building events to support Open Research and Open Science adoption. This program presents a unique end-to-end model for Open Science programs because it extends open science support beyond open repositories and open access publishing to the entire research lifecycle. We developed a logic model and a preliminary assessment metrics framework to evaluate the impact of the program activities based on existing data collected through event and workshop registrations and platform usage. The combination of these evaluation instruments has provided initial insight into our service productivity and impact. It will further help to answer more in-depth questions regarding the program impact, launch targeted surveys, and identify priority service areas and interesting Open Science projects.

As research becomes more interdisciplinary, fast-paced, data-intensive, and collaborative, there is an increasing need to share data and other research products in accordance with Open Science principles. In response to this need, we created an Open Science & Data Collaborations (OSDC) program at the Carnegie Mellon University Libraries that provides Open Science tools, training, collaboration opportunities, and community-building events to support Open Research and Open Science adoption. This program presents a unique end-to-end model for Open Science programs because it extends open science support beyond open repositories and open access publishing to the entire research lifecycle. We developed a logic model and a preliminary assessment metrics framework to evaluate the impact of the program activities based on existing data collected through event and workshop registrations and platform usage. The combination of these evaluation instruments has provided initial insight into our service productivity and impact. It will further help to answer more in-depth questions regarding the program impact, launch targeted surveys, and identify priority service areas and interesting Open Science projects.

The training of physician-scientists lies at the heart of future medical research. In this commentary, we apply Narayanamurti and Odumosu’s framework of the “discovery-invention cycle” to analyze the structure and outcomes of the integrated MD/PhD program. We argue that the linear model of “bench-to-bedside” research, which is also reflected in the present training of MD/PhDs, merits continual re-evaluation to capitalize on the richness of opportunities arising in clinical medicine. In addition to measuring objective career outcomes, as existing research has done, we suggest that detailed characterization of researchers’ efforts using both qualitative and quantitative techniques is necessary to understand if dual-degree training is being utilized. As an example, we propose that the application of machine learning and data science to corpora of biomedical literature and anonymized clinical data might allow us to see if there are objective “signatures” of research uniquely enabled by MD/PhD training. We close by proposing several hypotheses for shaping physician-scientist training, the relative merits of which could be assessed using the techniques proposed above. Our overarching message is the importance of deeply understanding individual career trajectories as well as characterizing organizational details and cultural nuances to drive new policy which shapes the future of the physician-scientist workforce.

As research becomes more interdisciplinary, fast-paced, data-intensive, and collaborative, there is an increasing need to share data and other research products in accordance with Open Science principles. In response to this need, we created an Open Science & Data Collaborations (OSDC) program at the Carnegie Mellon University Libraries that provides Open Science tools, training, collaboration opportunities, and community-building events to support Open Research and Open Science adoption. This program presents a unique end-to-end model for Open Science programs because it extends open science support beyond open repositories and open access publishing to the entire research lifecycle. We developed a logic model and a preliminary assessment metrics framework to evaluate the impact of the program activities based on existing data collected through event and workshop registrations and platform usage. The combination of these evaluation instruments has provided initial insight into our service productivity and impact. It will further help to answer more in-depth questions regarding the program impact, launch targeted surveys, and identify priority service areas and interesting Open Science projects., Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed., (Copyright: © 2022 Wang H et al.)