Development of open science guidelines for movement laboratories
Creators: name: Haas, Michelle C.
name: Sommer, Bettina
name: van Rekum, Simon
name: Moerman, Felix
name: Graf, Eveline S.
Publisher: name: ZHAW Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften
Year: 2024
Subjects: 000: Allgemeines und Wissenschaft

description: The abstract of this poster was published in Gait & Posture, Volume 113, Supplement 1 (ESMAC Abstracts 2024) and is available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2024.07.098
description: Introduction: In recent years, open science practices have gained attention, also in the field of biomechanical research. However, in terms of transparency and reproducibility, data collection and analysis still need improvement which could be leveraged by sharing of data and code (Borg et al., 2020). Research communities hold a vested responsibility and interest in developing appropriate guidelines for open science practices. In biomechanics, confidence in results is often low due to small sample sizes (Knudson, 2017). These concerns could be alleviated by providing access to more data that are collected and reported comparably. Moreover, data sharing allows pooling for meta-analyses and increases the available data for clinical decision making (Tirosh et al., 2010). Despite existing standards for reporting of kinematic and kinetic data by the international society of biomechanics (Derrick et al., 2020; Wu & Cavanagh, 1995), there are challenges in publishing data. Standards applicable to multiple measurement systems including data protection and ethical considerations are lacking. Comprehensive guidelines for data publication are needed to increase transparency, reliability, and replicability.
Research Question: What open science practices are currently used in Swiss movement laboratories and what elements are needed in guidelines to facilitate more transparent research practices?
Methods: An online survey including 16 multiple choice and open questions was conducted in ten Swiss movement laboratories. The survey was divided into the following sections: sharing of data, re-use of data, and currently known standards or software used. Following this, a workshop with four Swiss movement laboratories was conducted to deepen the understanding of current practices and establish requirements for the guidelines, which were subsequently developed.
Results: The participants’ experience in data sharing varied and included sharing on public repositories (n = 4), along publications (n = 6), with collaborators (n = 3), or personal contacts (n = 6). Data sharing incentives included publishing agreements (n = 3), funding agreements (n = 1), or personal beliefs towards open science (n = 2). Two out of six participants, who have re-used data of others, experienced difficulties. The diverse nature of software tools and practices used in data collection, processing, and storage, necessitates extensive metadata to ensure data reproducibility and interoperability. However, ensuring appropriate data protection and compliance with ethical regulations leads to uncertainty among the participants.
Discussion: Results of the online survey indicate that employees of Swiss movement laboratories are experienced in data sharing; however, some uncertainties remain. These uncertainties can be tackled by defining standards for metadata at each phase of the data lifecycle, along with providing clarification of ethical and data protection aspects. Moreover, the time needed to properly document data collection and processing procedures can be shortened by providing templates and recommendations along the guidelines on open science practices.