Sorry I missed this: In December 2025, the #NIH called for public comments on a revision to its data access policy, proposing "controlled-access" for certain kinds of data on human subjects.
-
Sorry I missed this: In December 2025, the #NIH called for public comments on a revision to its data access policy, proposing "controlled access" for certain kinds of data on human subjects. The proposal would also block access to researchers from certain "Countries of Concern" like China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela. The comment deadline was last week.
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-26-023.htmlMany neuroscientists submitted objections to the proposal.
https://www.thetransmitter.org/data-sharing/neuroscientists-challenge-nihs-proposed-human-data-access-policy/One objection: The current policy already requires "de-identification" of shared data on human subjects, and tests show these steps to be effective in blocking re-identification.
Another: Existing data repositories don't have the needed access controls, and data would have to migrate to new infrastructure.
Hence, they argue, the new policy would reduce data sharing, reduce replication studies, increase burdens for researchers, and slow compliance, without improving privacy.
#Data #OpenData #Medicine #Privacy #Trump #TrumpVResearch #USPol #USPolitics
-
T #medicine shared this topic
-
Sorry I missed this: In December 2025, the #NIH called for public comments on a revision to its data access policy, proposing "controlled access" for certain kinds of data on human subjects. The proposal would also block access to researchers from certain "Countries of Concern" like China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela. The comment deadline was last week.
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-26-023.htmlMany neuroscientists submitted objections to the proposal.
https://www.thetransmitter.org/data-sharing/neuroscientists-challenge-nihs-proposed-human-data-access-policy/One objection: The current policy already requires "de-identification" of shared data on human subjects, and tests show these steps to be effective in blocking re-identification.
Another: Existing data repositories don't have the needed access controls, and data would have to migrate to new infrastructure.
Hence, they argue, the new policy would reduce data sharing, reduce replication studies, increase burdens for researchers, and slow compliance, without improving privacy.
#Data #OpenData #Medicine #Privacy #Trump #TrumpVResearch #USPol #USPolitics
@petersuber The tension here is real — open science depends on open access, but 'controlled access' proposals often expand quietly once established. The country-based access restrictions are particularly concerning: scientific collaboration should be built on trust and verification, not geography. Worth watching closely as this sets a precedent.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login