The authors investigate in this paper the current situation of the FHIR resources adoption in order to FAIRify data in the medical research field. By aligning with the FAIR data principles, data becomes easier to share and reuse. This review aims to analyze how integrating the FHIR resources improved the findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability of datasets. By searching for the state-of-art situation in this field, we want to emphasize the significant role that FAIR data occupies in the medical research community, by also providing directions for further development and improved interoperability.

Open science (OS) awareness and skills are increasingly becoming an essential part of everyday scientific work as e.g., many journals require authors to share data. However, following an OS workflow can seem challenging at first. Thus, instructions by journals and other guidelines are important. But how comprehensive are they in the field of ecology and evolutionary biology (Ecol Evol)? To find this out, we reviewed 20 published OS guideline articles aimed for ecologists or evolutionary biologists, together with the data policies of 17 Ecol Evol journals to chart the current landscape of OS guidelines in the field, find potential gaps, identify field-specific barriers for OS and discuss solutions to overcome these challenges. We found that many of the guideline articles covered similar topics, despite being written for a narrow field or specific target audience. Likewise, many of the guideline articles mentioned similar obstacles that could hinder or postpone a transition to open data sharing. Thus, there could be a need for a more widely known, general OS guideline for Ecol Evol. Following the same guideline could also enhance the uniformity of the OS practices carried on in the field. However, some topics, like long-term experiments and physical samples, were mentioned surprisingly seldom, although they are typical issues in Ecol Evol. Of the journals, 15 out of 17 expected or at least encouraged data sharing either for all articles or under specific conditions, e.g. for registered reports and 10 of those required data sharing at the submission phase. The coverage of journal data policies varied greatly between journals, from practically non-existing to very extensive. As journals can contribute greatly by leading the way and making open data useful, we recommend that the publishers and journals would invest in clear and comprehensive data policies and instructions for authors.
Avoimen tieteen ymmärrys ja taitojen hallinta on yhä tärkeämpi osa tutkijan arkea, sillä esimerkiksi monet tieteelliset lehdet odottavat aineiston avointa jakamista. Avoimen tieteen työtapojen noudattaminen voi kuitenkin tuntua alkuun haastavalta, minkä vuoksi esimerkiksi tieteellisten lehtien ja muiden tahojen laatimat ohjeet ovat tärkeitä. Mutta kuinka kattavia ne ovat ekologian ja evoluutiobiologian alalla? Kävimme läpi 20 julkaistua ekologeille tai evoluutiobiologeille suunnattua avoimen tieteen ohjeistusta sekä 17 ekologian ja evoluutiobiologian tieteellisen lehden datakäytännöt, tarkoituksenamme kartoittaa alojen avoimen tieteen ohjeiden nykytilaa, löytää mahdollisia puutteita, tunnistaa alakohtaisia esteitä avoimen tieteen käytäntöjen toteutumiselle sekä keskustella ratkaisuista, joilla nämä haasteet voitaisiin ratkaista. Havaitsimme, että monet ohjeistukset käsittelivät samankaltaisia aiheita, vaikka ne oli tarkoitettu kapealle erityisalalle tai suunnattu hyvin rajoitetulle kohderyhmälle. Samoin monissa ohjeistuksissa mainittiin samankaltaisia aineistojen avoimen jakamisen hidastamista tai estämistä aiheuttavia haasteita. Toiset aiheet, kuten pitkäaikaiskokeet ja fyysiset näytteet, sen sijaan mainittiin yllättävän harvoin, vaikka niissä on tyypillisiä ekologian ja evoluutiobiologian alojen haasteita. Tieteellisistä lehdistä 15:ssä 17:sta vaadittiin tai vähintään kannustettiin jakamaan aineisto avoimesti joko kaikkien artikkelien osalta tai tietyin edellytyksin, esim. rekisteröityjen tutkimusraporttien osalta. Lisäksi 10 näistä lehdistä edellytti aineiston avointa jakamista jo submittointivaiheessa. Tieteellisten lehtien aineisto‐ohjeiden kattavuus vaihteli suuresti lehtien välillä, käytännössä olemattomasta hyvin laajaan. Koska tieteellisillä lehdillä on suuri vaikutusvalta avoimen tieteen käytäntöjen edistämiseen, suosittelemme kustantajia ja lehtiä panostamaan selkeisiin ja kattaviin aineistolinjauksiin ja ohjeistuksiin.

Among descriptive sensory evaluation methods, temporal methods have a wide audience in food science because they make it possible to follow perception as close as possible to the moment when sensations are perceived. The aim of this work was to describe 30 years of research involving temporal methods by mapping the scientific literature using a systematic scoping review. Thus, 363 research articles found from a search in Scopus and Web of Science from 1991 to 2022 were included. The extracted data included information on the implementation of studies referring to the use of temporal methods (details related to subjects, products, descriptors, research design, data analysis, etc.), reasons why they were used and the conclusions they allowed to be drawn. Metadata analysis and critical appraisal were also carried out. A quantitative and qualitative synthesis of the results allowed the identification of trends in the way in which the methods were developed, refined, and disseminated. Overall, a large heterogeneity was noted in the way in which the temporal measurements were carried out and the results presented. Some critical research gaps in establishing the validity and reliability of temporal methods have also been identified. They were mostly related to the details of implementation of the methods (e.g., almost no justification for the number of consumers included in the studies, absence of report on panel repeatability) and data analysis (e.g., prevalence of use of exploratory data analysis, only 20% of studies using confirmatory analyses considering the dynamic nature of the data). These results suggest the need for general guidelines on how to implement the method, analyze and interpret data, and report the results. Thus, a template and checklist for reporting data and results were proposed to help increase the quality of future research.

Debate has surrounded whether the participation of trans women in female sporting categories is fair, specifically the retained male physiological advantage due to increased testosterone compared to cisgender females. Recently, individual sporting organisations have been investigating and assessing policies regarding trans women athlete participation in female categories, resulting in several banning participation. This review aims to discuss the scientific evidence and provide appropriate guidance for the inclusion of trans women in elite competitive female fencing categories. Fencing is an intermittent sport, where competitions can span 1 to 3 days. The lunge is the most common movement used to attack opponents, where a successful hit relies on the speed of the action. Male puberty induced increased circulating testosterone promotes a greater stature, cardiovascular function, muscle mass, and strength compared to cisgender females, culminating in a ~12-40% sport performance advantage. Elite cisgender male fencers perform significantly higher, ~17-30%, jump heights and leg power measures compared to elite cisgender female fencers, resulting in faster lunges. Trans women receiving androgen-suppression therapy for 12 months showed significant reductions in strength, lean body mass, and muscle surface area, but even after 36 months, the measurements of these three indices remained above those for cisgender females. Previous male muscle mass and strength can be retained through continuation of resistance training. The literature reviewed shows that there is a retained physiological advantage for trans women who have undergone male puberty when participating in the elite competitive female fencing category. A proposed solution of an open or third gender category for elite fencing competition promotes fair competition, while allowing trans women to compete in their chosen sport.

With the recent advancement in the field of machine learning, health synthetic data has become a promising technique to address difficulties with time consumption when accessing and using electronic medical records for research and innovations. However, health synthetic data utility and governance have not been extensively studied. A scoping review was conducted to understand the status of evaluations and governance of health synthetic data following the PRISMA guidelines. The results showed that if synthetic health data are generated via proper methods, the risk of privacy leaks has been low and data quality is comparative to real data. However, the generation of health synthetic data has been generated on a case-by-case basis instead of being scaled up. Furthermore, regulations, ethics, and data sharing of health synthetic data have primarily been inexplicit, although common principles for sharing such data do exist.

BACKGROUND: The FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles were proposed in 2016 to set a path towards reusability of research datasets. In this systematic review, we assessed the FAIRness of datasets associated with peer-reviewed articles in veterinary epidemiology research published since 2017, specifically looking at salmonids and dairy cattle. We considered the differences in practices between molecular epidemiology, the branch of epidemiology using genetic sequences of pathogens and hosts to describe disease patterns, and non-molecular epidemiology.
RESULTS: A total of 152 articles were included in the assessment. Consistent with previous assessments conducted in other disciplines, our results showed that most datasets used in non-molecular epidemiological studies were not available (i.e., neither findable nor accessible). Data availability was much higher for molecular epidemiology papers, in line with a strong repository base available to scientists in this discipline. The available data objects generally scored favourably for Findable, Accessible and Reusable indicators, but Interoperability was more problematic.
CONCLUSIONS: None of the datasets assessed in this study met all the requirements set by the FAIR principles. Interoperability, in particular, requires specific skills in data management which may not yet be broadly available in the epidemiology community. In the discussion, we present recommendations on how veterinary research could move towards greater reusability according to FAIR principles. Overall, although many initiatives to improve data access have been started in the research community, their impact on the availability of datasets underlying published articles remains unclear to date.