Potential projects to work on together

[lwjohnst86]

I reorganized the ideas from our brainstorming session into some general topics and grouped several together. I also separated (what I thought) was more of the potential outputs of doing the project from potential projects themselves.

TASK: Please comment on which projects you'd like to work on, in the order you'd prioritize working on them.

1. R Package: Build an R package that automates or streamlines some basic setup, open science, and organizational tasks.
2. Scoping review: Scrapping websites, resources, institutions, and publications for projects and initiatives similar to this one. To map out the space and as a scoping review. This has the added advantage that it would:
   • Create a list of online platforms and databases that are already out there which can help researchers
   • Create a repository/list of various tools/workflows/hints of how to improve your science in relation to open science
   • Compile already existing resources into one place
   • Determine how much new content we need to create vs how much we should reorganize old content
3. Survey: (added this after the session) Creating a survey to send to other researchers to learn what they need to work effectively and what barriers they encounter, and use these results as added information.

Regardless of the project we decide, the outputs would be many things, such as:

• Potential alternative ways to disseminate research findings
• Guidelines on various procedures, like data handling, data analysis, etc.
• "Standard operating procedure" for how to develop good workflows/pipelines
• Templates for setting expectations and getting agreement for how to navigate shared data/software/files

[AlisaDK]

Help with the scoping review. Also, we've talked about a package in R for 2-sample MR analyses.

[danielibsen]

Scoping review

[hchats]

(In order) Scoping review, survey, R package

[Aastedet]

R package.

Would like to familiarize myself with the sdcmicro package to synthesize anonymized datasets for sharing/attaching to papers. Planning ahead and incorporating it in theworkflow, so that ultimately, the final Rmd-document that generates the paper can also be run on the anonymized dataset and reproduce the paper (or at least serve as reproducible approximation of the text, regression analyses and visualizations of the paper - the raw data can't be easily anonymized, so the data wrangling that generated the final dataset/variables cannot be reproduced this way).

If it is feasible to incorporate in the workflow, I'd like to make it easier for researchers to adopt.

[MaleneRevsbech]

R Package, surveys, Scoping review, where 2 and 3 are almost equally weighted.

[AndersAskeland]

R package, scoping review and survey (in that order).

[lwjohnst86]

There looks like a split between the scoping review and the R package... So I was thinking, since it isn't a good idea to have "too many chefs in the kitchen", we can have two projects going at once that anyone can freely jump into either one if they want to. So that way we have about 3-4 people per project, which is a good number to have for a project. I'll setup one main Issue for each project to use for tracking tasks and organizing things. That way you need only look to that issue and get a sense of what you want/need to do.