Brainstorm ways to display/write about what we've found from the scoping review. How do we show the "results"?

[lwjohnst86]

No description provided.

[MarioGuCBMR]

Got inspired so here are my two cents!

1. An overall description with a nice figure of how many papers and how we have categorized them.

Then we can organize the sections in terms of themes. For me I would love to include a section where we show how to stabilsh open collaboration differs according the span of the projects: one lab, one center, multiple centers and one field. An overview of how each of this papers discusses their needs and how they have stablished open collaboration would make us the first source that compiles all of this information in one place.

Another section are the tools. I think we should highlight in a section that many of these papers focus on tools and their needs. A summary of how many tools described per their utility (pre-registration for example) would be amazing. A nice touch would be that many of these papers just offer their fields', so we can offer a final figure summarizing tools that can work transversally.

Last but not least, we have several papers talking about the origins of collaboration. How they often start with a systematic review or analysis of the needs (though this depends a lot on the paper). Summarizing the potential ways to start and highlighting the differences according to the span of the project can be a great way to start.

I said last, but I want to highlight that, since we have the chance, I would mention that very little top-bottom changes are suggested. Of course this is because many of the open collaborations are born in a democratic way (bottom basically). I would like this to be one of the impactful messages, but since the content is limited, it can go to discussion as long as we all agree.

More to come! Let's start a thread and discuss about this tomorrow!!

[danielibsen]

Expanding on your suggestion I see these tables and figures:

• Figure 1: CONSORT diagram showing study selection process and the number of included studies
• Table 1: Overview of the studies and their results
• Figure 2: Visual summary of our recommendations for biomedical projects. (starting with the individual level: workflows and skills => research group: different tools like git/github/R, documentation and procedures for governance and contributions for collaboration => research center/research field: building communities and supporting via workshops, educational material and improving incentives.
• Table 2: Opportunities and barriers for open collaboration (thinking about removing the barriers from the main table and instead summarize them in a table where we also provide the opportunities).

This could be our own distillation/framework, also based on our own experiences through this project and other projects, to improve open collaborative practices in biomedical research.