Best practices to evaluate the impact of biomedical research software-metric collection beyond citations

Awan Afiaz, Andrey A. Ivanov, John Chamberlin, David Hanauer, Candace L. Savonen, Mary J. Goldman, Martin Morgan, Michael Reich, Alexander Getka, Aaron Holmes, Sarthak Pati, Dan Knight, Paul C. Boutros, Spyridon Bakas, J. Gregory Caporaso, Guilherme Del Fiol, Harry Hochheiser, Brian Haas, Patrick D. Schloss, James A. EddyJake Albrecht, Andrey Fedorov, Levi Waldron, Ava M. Hoffman, Richard L. Bradshaw, Jeffrey T. Leek, Carrie Wright

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Motivation: Software is vital for the advancement of biology and medicine. Impact evaluations of scientific software have primarily emphasized traditional citation metrics of associated papers, despite these metrics inadequately capturing the dynamic picture of impact and despite challenges with improper citation. Results: To understand how software developers evaluate their tools, we conducted a survey of participants in the Informatics Technology for Cancer Research (ITCR) program funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). We found that although developers realize the value of more extensive metric collection, they find a lack of funding and time hindering. We also investigated software among this community for how often infrastructure that supports more nontraditional metrics were implemented and how this impacted rates of papers describing usage of the software. We found that infrastructure such as social media presence, more in-depth documentation, the presence of software health metrics, and clear information on how to contact developers seemed to be associated with increased mention rates. Analysing more diverse metrics can enable developers to better understand user engagement, justify continued funding, identify novel use cases, pinpoint improvement areas, and ultimately amplify their software's impact. Challenges are associated, including distorted or misleading metrics, as well as ethical and security concerns. More attention to nuances involved in capturing impact across the spectrum of biomedical software is needed. For funders and developers, we outline guidance based on experience from our community. By considering how we evaluate software, we can empower developers to create tools that more effectively accelerate biological and medical research progress. Availability and implementation: More information about the analysis, as well as access to data and code is available at https://github.com/fhdsl/ITCR_Metrics_manuscript_website.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numberbtae469
JournalBioinformatics
Volume40
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2024

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Statistics and Probability
  • Biochemistry
  • Molecular Biology
  • Computer Science Applications
  • Computational Theory and Mathematics
  • Computational Mathematics

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Best practices to evaluate the impact of biomedical research software-metric collection beyond citations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this