Title: NCRI Data Sharing Debate
1NCRI Data Sharing Debate Peter Dukes Lead MRC
Population Research Data Support Service Medical
Research Council
2Invitation
- To give a funders perspective on
- benefits / drawbacks of data-sharing and then
initiate a floor discussion around the issues
raised. - on data-sharing, and the obligations that fundees
are increasingly coming under to share their
data.
3Benefits
- Assumption Datasharing is a good thing
4Assumption Datasharing is a good thing
- OECD
- Publicly-funded research data are a public good
produced in the public interest - Europe
- European Bioinformatics Institute
- Community curated databases
- European Strategic Forum on Research
Infrastructure - Data Deluge
- Curation and Provenance
- Interoperability
- Multi-disciplinarity of research
- Linking of publications to data
5Assumption Datasharing is a good thing
- UK Research Councils
- NERC Data Grid
- 9 data stewardship centres
- ESRC Economic Social Data Service
- UK Data Archive
- ESRC requires datasets to be offered to UK Data
Archive - MRC
- Policy requires datasharing plans
- Population Research Data Support Service
- e-Science and informatics initiatives
- CancerGrid, NeuroPsyGrid, CLEF, Votes
- NCRI Bioinformatics initiative
- NHS
- Connecting for Health
- Research Capability Programme
- UK Pub Med Central
6Data sharing
- Science, culture and organisation matter
7Science, culture organisation
- Databases, archives, biobanks, grids
- Funding model for sharing
- User-led oversight
- Performance service quality science
- Trials, cross-sectional longitudinal
- Investment in the cohort
- Set up
- Nurturing
- Effort to collect, clean analyse
- Performance science outputs
Community data services
PI-led population studies
8Science, culture organisation
- Not collected for research
- NHS clinical management data
- Social services data
- Education
- Data to support service improvement and policy
- Connecting for Health
- e-Health
- Research capability programme
- Quality service data for patient benefit
- Care
- research
Routine data
Researchable routine data
9e-health related research landscape
Omics data
Patient groups
Cohorts Trials
Bio Banks
NHS Clinical Data
Demographic data
Educational Environmental Social Data
10Population sciences perspective
11What MRC and PIs say
Hierarchy
- MRC Council says
- Data sharing is the norm in the public interest
- Researchers should submit DSP plans as part of
grant proposals - We will fund preservation sharing
- Directors PIs say
- The idea is OK, but for many investigators
restricted access to their data set is their
intellectual capital - Not everyone can be a scavenger feeding off the
work of others
MRC Council
Funding Boards
Unit Directors
Study PIs
Data scientists Managers
12What Data Managers say
- Benefits of a Sharing Support infrastructure
- Preventing loss of knowledge
- Preserving the value of historic investment
- New opportunities for collaboration
- Discovery
- Open up legacy assets
- Networking spread of good practice
- Technical enhancements
- Automation reduced burden
- Up to date guidance
- No need to roll your own
- More effective induction training
- Greater cost effectiveness across MRC
- Confident partnerships NHS, other RCs
- But we need resources and support from the top
MRC Council
Funding Boards
Unit Directors
Study PIs
Data scientists Managers
13Drawbacks
- Little evidence of real benefits
- New science improved health
- More efficient informatics
- NCRI Bioinformatics can help here
- MRC Data Support Service - document
- Little understanding of the real costs
- Significant heterogeneity of needs
- We dont know all the technical answers
- Weak public engagement
- Weak academic engagement
- Complexity
- Many initiatives stakeholder
14End
15Wellcome Trust
CfH RCP
MRCT
NCRI
BIOBANK
AMS
e-Science
DH NIHR
EBI
CLINICAL
GENOMIC
UKCRC
HEIs
GOVERNANCE
INVOLVE
BBSRC
PIAG NIGB
MRC POPULATION-BASED RESEARCH
FSA
ENVIRONMENT
SUS
NERC
NRES
SOCIO ECONOMIC
MoD
OSI
DEFRA
OECD
DFID
DCC
UKDA
CST
RCUK
UKDF
ONS
EPSRC
ESRC