{"id":1866,"date":"2013-10-22T14:01:19","date_gmt":"2013-10-22T14:01:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/notebooks.dataone.org\/?p=1866"},"modified":"2013-10-22T14:08:31","modified_gmt":"2013-10-22T14:08:31","slug":"designing-a-systematic-review-assessing-prevalence-of-open-science-data-sharing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/notebooks.dataone.org\/data-science\/designing-a-systematic-review-assessing-prevalence-of-open-science-data-sharing\/","title":{"rendered":"Designing a Systematic Review Assessing Prevalence of Open Science Data Sharing"},"content":{"rendered":"

In a previous post<\/a> I realized the need to do a systematic review of literature to determine prevalence of the use of figshare, both in terms of citation and in terms of actual studies of an open science platform such as figshare.<\/p>\n

To start with, I need to determine what databases are available to me to design the systematic review.<\/p>\n

I’ll start at:\u00a0http:\/\/www.lib.utk.edu\/databases\/<\/a><\/p>\n