바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.53 No.2
Citation Share

Metadata Element Design for Korean Medicine Research Data Management and Re-use

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science / Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, (P)1225-598X; (E)2982-6292
2019, v.53 no.2, pp.223-246
https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2019.53.2.223



& (2019). Metadata Element Design for Korean Medicine Research Data Management and Re-use. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 53(2), 223-246, https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2019.53.2.223
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

This research makes the metadata element design for Korean medicine research data management and re-use. Derived metadata elements are verified in research data of Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine. TTAK.K0-10.0976 Standard, DataCite metadata Schema and National Research Data Platform of KISTI were analyzed to derive the metadata elements. Including Identifier, 27 elements were derived as top-level elements with 29 mandatory elements, 13 recommended elements and 31 optional elements. The degree of elements’ necessity and new metadata elements were investigated and suggested in the survey by six domain experts in korean medicine field. In this study subject classification for the korean medicine research data are suggested. The final version of metadata schema was tested and verified by comparing with the legacy metadata fields. The research results can be used to describe the Korean medicine research data: items and files.

keywords
Research Data, Korean Medicine, Metadata, Repository, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, 연구 데이터, 한의학, 메타데이터, 리포지터리, 한국한의학연구원

Reference

1.

과학기술정보통신부. “국가과학기술표준분류.” 2018 [cited 2019. 1. 6.]

2.

김선태 외. 2017. 『연구 데이터 관리 및 공유를 위한 메타데이터(The metadata for the managing and sharing research data)』. 한국정보통신기술협회. 정보통신단체표준 TTAK.K0-10.0976.

3.

신은정. 2018. “국가R&D사업 데이터 관리 계획 도입의 방향.” 『STEPI 과기정책포럼』.

4.

조성복. 2012. “한의학 자원 DB 통합을 위한 정보화 전략 기획(ISP)에 관한 연구.”

5.

한국보건산업진흥원. “보건산업기술분류체계.” 2013 [cited 2019. 1. 6.]

6.

한국보건산업진흥원. “HT융합기술의 분류체계 연구.” 2015 [cited 2019. 1. 6.]

7.

한국보건산업진흥원. “HT표준기술분류체계.” 2014 [cited 2019. 1. 6.]

8.

Adams Becker, S. et al. 2017. NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Library Edition. Austin, Texas:The New Media Consortium.

9.

DataCite Statistics. [online] [cited 2018. 12. 11.]<https://stats.datacite.org/#tab-datacentres>

10.

Europe 2020 strategy. [online] [cited 2019. 3. 6.] <https://bit.ly/2gEXPR2>

11.

European Commission. 2016. Open Innovation, Open Science, Open to the World. ISBN 978-92-79-57346-0 doi:10.2777/061652

12.

Horizon 2020. [online] [cited 2019. 2. 6.] <https://bit.ly/1Kz2D4x>

13.

Innovation Union. [online] [cited 2019. 2. 6.] <https://bit.ly/2D1fRKN>

14.

Johnson, R., Chiarelli, A. and Parsons, T. 2016. Data asset framework (DAF) survey results. figshare. Fileset. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3796305.v4

15.

JST. 2017a. JST Policy on Open Access to Research Publications and Research Data. Management. https://www.jst.go.jp/EN/about/openscience/policy_openscience_en.pdf

16.

JST. 2017b. Implementation Guidelines: JST Policy on Open Access to Research Publications and Research Data Management. https://www.jst.go.jp/EN/about/openscience/guideline_openscience_en.pdf

17.

National Academy of Sciences (US), National Academy of Engineering (US) and Institute of Medicine (US) Committee. 2009. Ensuring the Utility and Integrity of Research Data in a Digital Age. Ensuring the Integrity, Accessibility, and Stewardship of Research Data in the Digital Age. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK215264/ doi: 10.17226/12615

18.

Röhrig, B. et al. 2009. “Types of study in medical research: part 3 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications." Deutsches Arzteblatt International, 106(15): 262.

19.

Rolando, L. 2015. “Data Management Plans as a Research Tool.” Bul. Am. Soc. Info. Sci. Tech, 41: 43-45. doi:10.1002/bult.2015.1720410510

20.

Rylance, R. et al. 2016. Concordat on Open Research Data. https://www.ukri.org/files/legacy/documents/concordatonopenresearchdata-pdf/

21.

SPEC Kit 334. [online] [cited 2019. 2. 6.]<http://publications.arl.org/Research-Data-Management-Services-SPEC-Kit-334/>

22.

Starr, J. and Gastl, A. 2011. “isCitedBy: A Metadata Scheme for DataCite.” D-Lib Magazine, 17(1).

23.

Süt, N. 2014. “Study designs in medicine." Balkan medical journal, 31(4): 273.

24.

Tenopir, C. et al. 2017. “Research Data Services in European Academic Research Libraries.” LIBER Quarterly, 27(1): 23-44. DOI:http://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10180

25.

Uman, L. S. 2011. “Systematic reviews and meta-analyses." Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 57.

26.

Zeng, X. et al. 2015. “The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review." Journal of evidence-based medicine, 8(1): 2-10.

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science

e-Submission OA Policy