data management planning presentation at jisc workshop
DESCRIPTION
Presentation by University of Leeds staff Professor Richard Hall (Spinal Biomechanics) and Rachel Proudfoot (RoaDMaP Project Manager) on data management planning developments from academic and administrative perspectives. Presentation given during the Data Management Planning strand of JISC's "Components of Institutional Research Data Services" workshop, 24th October 2012TRANSCRIPT
RoaDMaPLEEDS RESEARCH DATA MANAGEMENT PILOT
Data management planning
http://library.leeds.ac.uk/roadmap-project
Rachel Proudfoot, RoaDMaP Project Manager
Richard Hall, Professor of Spinal Biomechanics
RoaDMaP activity
Current practice• Tim Banks, Faculty IT Manager,
regularly using for ESRC applications
• Research data risk assessment for all funding applications and awards (in theory)
• mixed practice across Faculties
Yes44%
No56%
DMP
Survey Comments
“Required as part of the ethical approval process”
“Mostly covered in NHS Ethics submission”
“Completing such a plan presupposes that there is support staff available.”
“It was fairly ropey - not something I took very seriously for the application”
“This is completely unnecessary as a requirement. Research is supposed to be innovative. Most things cannot be foreseen.”
What has worked/is working
• “A data management plan ... must be created for each proposed research project or funding application.”
• Practical improvements to DMPOnline - sharing plans
• Replace or refresh existing processes
• DMPOnline: not all funders equally well served; word length
• Example DMPs can be reassuring – not all DMPs complex
• Colleagues concerned about ‘new role’ in DMP
Lessons learnt
What challenges remain & approach
• “Data management plans should take account of and ensure compliance with relevant legislative frameworks”
• Joined up approach Ethics Policy/Data Management Planning
• Cultural change: feedback loop, flexibility in how requirement met
• Internal IT systems – data exchange / feeds
• Models of DMP ownership
• Institutional templates / boilerplate text
What DCC / MRD activity would help
• Continue to enhance DMPOnline: coordinate testing across funders / projects; funder compliant formats; funder templates; alert function to review
• Work with Je-S: ensure no duplication of effort
• Co-ordinate policy work with JULIET
• Testimony of benefits to research, quantification of benefits
Case Study - SpineFX
Research•Deliver cutting-edge inter-related research projects •Bridge the gap between academia, industry and healthcare … with a focus on SMEs
•Transfer new knowledge and skills to the industrial and healthcare sectors•Disseminate SpineFX output through a selection of delivery vehicles
Training•Provide a multidisciplinary training programs in cutting-edge public and commercial research environments •Deliver leading cross- and beyond-network training events•Build a robust inter-professional training framework
Aims: To develop highly-skilled researchers capable of delivering effective solutions to Spinal Disease and Trauma and to significantly enhance the European Research Area as a global leader in Biomedical Engineering In the public and private sectors.
Enhanced ERA
Improved Technology
Patient Benefit
Case Study - SpineFX
osteoporosis traumametastases
Basic
Science
•Bone Mechanics and Damage , Vienna• Spinal Metastases, Leeds
• Spinal Biomechanics and Load Sharing, Hamburg• Disc Mechanobiology, Bern
Orientated Research •Spine Model, AnyBody•Diagnostic Tools for Fracture Risk Prediction, Vienna
Applied Research• Pathology Specific Augmentation, BoneSupport + Bern• Cement Injection Technology, Leeds• Interface of Fixation Devices, Ulrich + Hamburg
Yea
rs
1 t
o 4
Case Study - SpineFX
Imaging
Contextual
Mechanical
Case Study - SpineFX
Part of Original EU ITN proposal
• Included in the Management Resource
Activities slow initially:
• Lack of Institutional Support
• Delay in Provision
• Competing Priorities in the Debt-ridden UK Economy
RCUK and EU Horizon 2020 (FP8) plans and JISC Roadmap opportunity have provided fresh impetus
Case Study - SpineFX
Activities thus far:
• Working through DMPOnline & resulting plan
• Interviews with researchers and fellows
• Cultural as well as procedural change
• Shaping institutional policy and activities
• Written into current EU project under negotiation
• €13.4 M over 5 years
Case Study - SpineFX
Lesson learnt:
• Benefits • Easy access to the research group data
• Instils a culture of co-operation from the outset when using data
• Enhances research through additional governance structures
• Must be part of the research activity from the planning stage
• Benefits accrued when:
• Researchers at the ‘coal-face’ are included in the planning
• A requirements specification is developed
• Project risk assessment is undertaken to indentify challenges.
Case Study - SpineFX
Lessons learnt
• Challenges• Institutions need to be resourced correctly (staff, time, data storage
facility…)
• You’ll always use the space available
• Even the simplest data, needs a lot of thought and needs researcher engagement
• Changes in researcher technology
• Understanding the researcher requirements.
Acknowledgements
• Marie Curie Fellows: Ondrej Holub, Antony BouFrancis and Nicola Brandolini – also Daniel Skrzypiec.
• The consortium acknowledges the funding provided by the EU under the FP7 Marie Curie Action - Grant number - 238690
• Roadmap Colleagues• Graham Blyth and Tim Banks