1 of 11

PREPARING LIBRARIANS AND RESEARCHERS FOR THE NIH DATA MANAGEMENT AND SHARING POLICY

Lena Bohman, MSLIS

Dani LaPreze, MLS, MS

2 of 11

CALL TO ACTION

“If you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go together.”

Virtual, collaborative effort
Make it easy for others to contribute
Multiple perspectives
Organized by Hao Ye, U of Florida

3 of 11

WORKING TEAM

Hao Ye, University of Florida
Marla Hertz, University of Alabama at Birmingham
Kelsey Badger, The Ohio State University
Lena Bohman, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell
Hannah Calkins, Sage Bionetworks
Lucy Carr Jones, University of Virginia
Nicole Contaxis, New York University Langone & the National Center for Data Service
Andrea Denton, University of Virginia
Nina Exner, Virginia Commonwealth University

Lisa Federer, National Library of Medicine
Shannon Farrell, University of Minnesota
Tess Grynoch, University of Massachusetts
Barrie Hayes, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Amy Koshoffer, University of Cincinnati
Raisa Ionin, NIH Library
Seonyoung Kim, Washington University in St. Louis
Dani LaPreze, University of Louisville

Alex May, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Jenny Muilenburg, University of Washington
Jess Newman McDonald, University of Tennessee
Christine Nieman, University of Maryland Baltimore, NNLM Region 1
Reid Otsuji, University of California, San Diego
Daria Orlowska, Western Michigan University
Lauren Phegley, University of Pennsylvania
Melissa Ratajeski, University of Pittsburgh

Debra Rand, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell
Rebecca Renirie, Central Michigan University
Lauren Robinson, University of Kentucky Medical Center Library,
Kerry Sewell, East Carolina University
Collin Schwantes, EcoHealth Alliance
Cynthia Sheffield, NIH Library
Katy Smith, Saint Louis University
Ummea Urmi, New York University Langone Health

4 of 11

FINAL PRODUCTS

Glossary: to develop a tool/glossary of jargon and other terms used in grant applications and in DMSPs for librarians to use when working with researchers.
Checklist for Researchers: to develop checklists for researchers to follow before writing a DMSP and before submitting a DMSP.
Checklist for Librarians: to develop a source for librarians to use in preparing themselves/their institution for the policy.
Example DMSPs: to develop a collection of existing and/or created example DMSPs following the NIH requirements.
Repository Finder: to develop a searchable database of repositories for librarians and researchers to locate appropriate open repositories for data.

5 of 11

GLOSSARY

Grant Speak in Context

Grant Glossary for Librarians

Data Terms for Researchers

6 of 11

CHECKLIST FOR RESEARCHERS

7 of 11

CHECKLIST FOR LIBRARIANS

This document is for use by librarians who will be assisting researchers with the new NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy. Librarians who will be working on this issue may be in a variety of roles, including data management, research and instruction, public services, reference or solo librarian, so this checklist is intended to be broad enough to encompass anyone who finds themselves in need of guidance. There are four main checklists: an environmental scan document for the librarian to assess readiness at their institution, a list of potential partners to consider, possible data service areas for librarians, and a list of resources that librarians can use in reference to the other areas of the guide. These checklists are not meant to be taken as all or nothing, but rather utilized with your particular situation in mind. For instance, the list of possible data service areas provides a range of suggestions that librarians can consider with a mind to their institutions unique needs and the staff and expertise they can call on.

8 of 11

EXAMPLE DMSPS

Catalog of Example Plans

Annotated Example

The example DMSPs group created two outputs. The first was a website that cataloged existing data management plans available online. These were sourced from various online repositories, including the public plans available via DMPTool and collections from libraries. We created metadata for each plan including assigning each a broad scholarly field and keywords. We attempted to focus on plans most directly comparable to the new NIH format, which meant we discarded some available examples that were over 10 pages long or in areas unrelated to science or social science. A majority of the available examples wound up being from grant applications to the NSF.

Our second product was an annotated example plan. This plan takes a resource sharing plan, compliant with the NIH 2003 policy, and converts it to the new 2023 plan format, with tips for writing each of the 6 sections. We left many details generic, but this is based off of a real grant proposal that a member of our group worked on, and we hope it will be realistic and directly applicable to researchers. The tips were compiled by the primary author of the sample plan as she worked on it, so they should speak to many researchers’ real experience writing the DMSP.

In addition to our sample plan, I am aware of two other groups that have put out sample plans based on the new 2023 format. One is available from the University of Arizona in DMPTool, and there are 4 created by NIMH. These 5 plans are also in our catalog website if anyone would like to see them.

9 of 11

REPOSITORY FINDER

Similar in format to Cornell Data Storage Site
Available in December

Format Reference (Cornell)

The repository finder will be a tool to help researchers choose an appropriate option for sharing their data. It is based off the website Cornell created for researchers to choose data storage options, which is in the screenshot. The Cornell website is open source and the code will be modified for this project. When researchers open the repository finder, they will have a series of survey questions they can answer in the left hand menu, such as the size of the data set, if they need controlled access, and so on. Selecting answers to the questions will narrow the list of repositories shown, until researchers are left with a list of repositories according to their research needs. Then, they will be able to do a detailed comparison of the remaining options based on the metadata collected in the tool. If you would like to test this workflow, you can try the Cornell site to visualize how it would work.

Because of the needed web development, this project has a longer lead time needed than the other resources we have created. Right now, the project remains in development. The group anticipates that a version will be available through the national center for data services in December, and then they will release a github page with the needed code to host a customized version on your own library website.

10 of 11

RELEASE & HOW TO USE

Released on OSF
Most documents available now
Repository finder later release

Aimed for librarians/institutions who have limited resources in particular
Ready-made “kit” that can be given to researchers or modified to suit your institution

Except for the repository finder, which, as I just mentioned, will have a release in december, all of these projects are available on our OSF project page. You can directly download the documents there, and feel free to pass on the page to administrators and researchers in your institutions, or other librarians in your network who may be interested. We are hoping for as wide a distribution as possible. We have also used the OSF project wiki to compile information about each group and the products we released, as well as a sample citation, similar in format to a README.

One of our goals in creating these products was to create a sort of “kit” for librarians or researchers who need information about the new policy and materials to distribute. We hope that these materials will be especially useful for librarians in small medical libraries, such as solo hospital librarians, by decreasing the amount that they need to create from scratch to provide library support to researchers. We invite you to download the materials and take what is useful or remix them as needed, with attribution to our group. I have added many of the documents created by the group to our libguide at Hofstra for the NIH policy and used them to create resource packets for research support staff. They would also be great to supply to researchers in a presentation on the policy as take home handouts. So far, I have received positive feedback from our researchers, and I hope to hear from many of you that your patrons are also finding them useful.

11 of 11

THANK YOU

Lena.g.Bohman@Hofstra.edu

Dani.lapreze@Louisville.edu