Scholarlink

<p>Rapid and comprehensive data sharing is vital to the transparency and actionability of wildlife infectious disease research and surveillance. Unfortunately, most best practices for publicly sharing these data are focused on pathogen determination and genetic sequence data. Other facets of wildlife disease data – particularly negative results – are often withheld or, at best, summarized in a descriptive table with limited metadata. Here, we propose a minimum data and metadata reporting standard for wildlife disease studies. Our data standard identifies a set of 40 data fields (9 required) and 24 metadata fields (7 required) sufficient to standardize and document a dataset consisting of records disaggregated to the finest possible spatial, temporal, and taxonomic scale. We illustrate how this standard is applied to an example study, which documented a novel alphacoronavirus found in bats in Belize. Finally, we outline best practices for how data should be formatted for optimal re-use, and how researchers can navigate potential safety concerns around data sharing.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A minimum data standard for wildlife disease research and surveillance

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月21日

查看全文
  • Collin J. Schwantes,
  • Cecilia A. Sánchez,
  • Tess Stevens,
  • Ryan Zimmerman,
  • Greg Albery,
  • Daniel J. Becker,
  • Cole B. Brookson,
  • Rebekah C. Kading,
  • Carl N. Keiser,
  • Shashank Khandelwal,
  • Stephanie Kramer-Schadt,
  • Raphael Krut-Landau,
  • Clifton McKee,
  • Diego Montecino-Latorre,
  • Zoe O’Donoghue,
  • Sarah H. Olson,
  • Mika O’Shea,
  • Timothée Poisot,
  • Hailey Robertson,
  • Sadie J. Ryan,
  • Stephanie N. Seifert,
  • David Simons,
  • Amanda Vicente-Santos,
  • Chelsea L. Wood,
  • Ellie Graeden,
  • Colin J. Carlson

摘要

Rapid and comprehensive data sharing is vital to the transparency and actionability of wildlife infectious disease research and surveillance. Unfortunately, most best practices for publicly sharing these data are focused on pathogen determination and genetic sequence data. Other facets of wildlife disease data – particularly negative results – are often withheld or, at best, summarized in a descriptive table with limited metadata. Here, we propose a minimum data and metadata reporting standard for wildlife disease studies. Our data standard identifies a set of 40 data fields (9 required) and 24 metadata fields (7 required) sufficient to standardize and document a dataset consisting of records disaggregated to the finest possible spatial, temporal, and taxonomic scale. We illustrate how this standard is applied to an example study, which documented a novel alphacoronavirus found in bats in Belize. Finally, we outline best practices for how data should be formatted for optimal re-use, and how researchers can navigate potential safety concerns around data sharing.