Skip to main content

Notice

The new RDA web platform is still being rolled out. Existing RDA members PLEASE REACTIVATE YOUR ACCOUNT using this link: https://rda-login.wicketcloud.com/users/confirmation. Please report bugs, broken links and provide your feedback using the UserSnap tool on the bottom right corner of each page. Stay updated about the web site milestones at https://www.rd-alliance.org/rda-web-platform-upcoming-features-and-functionalities/.

Life Science Data Infrastructures IG (revived) Charter TAB Review

  • Creator
    Discussion
  • #136979

    Bridget Walker
    Participant

    Interest Group Title:  Life Science Data Infrastructures IG (currently ELIXIR Bridging Force IG)

    Please note: This is the revived ELIXIR Bridging Force IG Charter approved in 2014 and serving to transition to the new Life Science Data Infrastructures IG

    Charter: https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/elixir-bridging-force-ig/case-statemen

    Revised Charterhttps://rd-alliance.org/group/elixir-bridging-force-ig/case-statement/li

    Proposers: As requested by the Group on 18 May, 2 previous co-chair, Bengt Persson and Carole Goble to replaced with Susan Gregurick, Wolmar Nyberg Åkerström, Nicola Mulder and Ramana Madupu. Rob Hooft

    Date Received by TAB: 9 February 2022

    Date Revised Charter Received by TAB: 3 May 2022

    Date Original Review Completed:  9 March 2022

    Date 2nd Review Completed:  18 May 2022

    Comments post revisions: The added text gives indications on how the group intends to address the issues raised during the first round of reviews.  The new Charter is satisfactory.

     

    Review of Original Charter

    Summary:  

    This IG is a revision of the ELIXIR Bridging Force IG. The goals proposed are also a continuation of what has been done by the previous IG, i.e., explore and look for solutions to the challenges faced by people employing “omics” techniques. Since these thecniques can be applyied by several branches inside the life sciences, e.g., Toxicology, Genetics, Pharmacology, there is a clear need for infrastructures for storing, retrieving, promoting reuse of the common data shared among all of the life sciences branches. This kind of common infrastructure is of great importance to promote the integration between multiple domains that share these common data. Thus, the IG proposes to bring together organizations that have been deploying solutions for these challenges. The charter states that there are 4 organizations that have accepted to be part of this IG: ELIXIR, Biocommons, NIH Office of Data Science Strategy, and H3ABioNet. Their plan is to discuss these chalenges during sessions at the RDA plenaries.  

     

    Focus and Fit:  

    (Are the Interest Group objectives aligned with the RDA mission ?  Is the scope too large for effective progress, too small for an RDA effort, or not appropriate for the RDA?  Overall, is this a worthwhile effort for the RDA to take on?  Is this an effort that adds value over and above what is currently being done within the community?)

    The goals proposed by this IG are aligned with RDA mission and such an effort is very important. It would allow the collaboration between several domains that use the same techniques but can’t exchange data due to the lack of a common infrastructure. I also recognise that their proposal seems to be a little bit restricted, in the sense that I can’t find a plan on how to get more infrastructure organizations to join the group, and also how to make their discussions more open to the RDA community in order to get more feedback.

     

    Capacity:

    (Does the initial membership list include sufficient expertise, and disciplinary and international representation?  Are the people involved in the Interest Group sufficient to make tangible progress?  What individuals or organizations are missing?) 

    The members (as well as the international organizations) involved with the group are sufficient in terms of expertise. I believe that they are qualified enough to tackle the issues regarding the deployment as well as adoption of Life Science Data Infrastructure. I’m happy to see that they manage to invite an African organization to join the group. 

     

    Impact and Engagement:

    (Is it likely that the Interest Group will engage the intended community?  Is there evidence that the research community wants this?  Will the outcome(s) of the Interest Group foster data sharing and/or exchange?)

    From the charter, it is not clear how the group plans to engage with the Life Science data consumer community other than organizing session during the RDA plenaries. Also, the charter mention that the goal of the plenaries would be to discuss topics of interest of the organizations inside group. Although I think that this is not a problem per se, I believe that would be easier to engage with the Life Science wider community if they proposed an strategy to gather feedback on what are the issues that the users of the Life Science Data face on their day-to-day work. Other than that, for me, it is clear that the explored topic is of great value for the Life Science community and I am confident that the outcomes of the IG can foster data sharing/exchange.

     

    Decision:  

    Charter is Sufficient __; Charter Requires Revision X_; Charter is Rejected __

     

    Comments:

    Revision of the charter is suggested in order to incorporate details on how to promote the engagement of the community outside the member organizations of the IG.  It is also suggested to give some further details on how the IG plans to invite new organizations to become members of the IG.

     

Log in to reply.