Open Science In Health Research: Lessons Learned From The Cielo Project

Philip Payne, Omkar Lele, Beth Johnson, Erin Holve
2017 Zenodo  
There is an emergent and intensive dialogue in the United States concerned with the accessibility, reproducibility, and rigor of health research. This discussion is also closely aligned with the need to identify sustainable ways to expand the national research enterprise and generate actionable results that can be applied to improve the nation's health. The principles and practices of Open Science offer a promising path to address both goals by facilitating: 1) increased transparency of data
more » ... methods which promotes research reproducibility and rigor; and 2) cumulative efficiencies wherein research tools and the output of research are combined to accelerate the delivery of new knowledge in proximal domains resulting in greater productivity and a reduction in redundant research investments. Methods: AcademyHealth's Electronic Data Methods Forum (EDMF) implemented a proof-of-concept open science platform for health research, known as CIELO (the Collaborative Informatics Environment for Learning on Health Outcomes). EDMF conducted a user-centered design process in order to elucidate important and high-level requirements for creating and sustaining an open science paradigm. Results: By implementing CIELO and engaging a variety of potential users in its public beta testing, EDMF has been able to elucidate a broad range of stakeholder needs and requirements related to the use of an open science platform focused on health research in a variety of "real world" settings. Discussion: Our initial design and development experience over the course of the CIELO project has provided the basis for a vigorous dialogue between stakeholder community members regarding which capabilities will add the greatest value to an open science platform for the health research community. A number of important questions around user incentives, sustainability, and scalability will require further community dialogue and agreement.
doi:10.5281/zenodo.495794 fatcat:ydiyfdt44fbhzmw63u433kp3hy