Outsourcing neuroimaging data analysis Implications for scientific accountability and issues in the public interest.
Outsourcing neuroimaging data analysis Implications for scientific accountability and issues in the public interest.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.tics.2009.09.005
复制
发表时间：
2010-01
影响因子：
19.9
通讯作者：
Hasson, Uri
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dick, Anthony Steven;Hasson, Uri
罗丹的雕像《思想者》描绘了一个孤独的沉思者--一个科学家个人的标志性形象。从历史上看，这一直是包括哲学和心理学在内的认知科学领域科学研究的合适图标。然而，这一理想在许多学科中越来越难以实现，特别是在认知神经科学领域，多个领域的掌握往往超过任何一个人的能力。其结果是增加了合作的努力，其中的责任是分配给一个研究团队。然而，在认知神经科学方面有一个新兴的发展。在一种新的合作形式中，进行功能性神经成像的学术研究人员可以将数据分析外包给商业公司。虽然外包可能适用于某些分析情况，但对其他情况而言，它会引起授予机构和同行评审政策的重要考虑，在某些情况下可能会损害研究企业。虽然对于认知神经科学家来说，外包可能是复杂调查需求的副产品，但在其他学术领域也很常见。某些生物医学领域，包括神经科学，已经外包了透明和/或易于标准化的耗时程序（例如基因测序，组织分析和分子化合物的鉴定）。在这种情况下，外包使人们能够获得知识渊博的分析人员、先进的方法和昂贵的设备。这使研究人员能够保持在科学趋势的最前沿，在研究管道中维护几个不同的项目，并更快地完成项目。这些好处现在对神经成像仪来说是可用的。外包公司为学术界和私营行业客户（如制药公司）提供一系列神经成像服务。这些服务包括从低级图像转换到中间预处理步骤，再到完成预制分析管道（表1）。然而，外包也可能产生负面影响。负面影响的程度取决于研究人员转移控制权的程度[1]，而这又取决于外包关系的性质。从本质上讲，外包神经影像学数据分析是从获得咨询到外包研究工作本身的连续统一体。后者显然代表着对分析过程的失控（插文1），在这一点上，可以从学术机构本身提供的服务中吸取教训。大学已经意识到，科学家需要在数据密集型领域的分析支持，几个中心提供生物统计咨询服务（例如，贝斯以色列女执事医疗中心的生物医学研究信息学核心;俄亥俄州州立大学的生物统计中心）。虽然这些是“内部”服务，但其政策突出了伴随外部援助而来的控制和授权之间的微妙平衡。这些中心通常提供两种服务途径：（a）一般咨询，例如，最少概念输入的低水平分析，这通常不保证共同作者资格;或（B）构成“科学或智力贡献”的支持，在这种情况下，作者资格是有保证的[2，3;见政策示例：俄亥俄州州立大学，生物统计中心，Mandarpt准备（http：//tinyurl. com/nkltdy）;范德比尔特大学生物统计学系，手稿撰写政策（http：//tinyurl. com/ntkaz7）]。科学或智力贡献包括对研究设计或方案的输入，以及分析的计划或执行[4]。总结一下...
Rodin’s statue The Thinker depicts a solitary ponderer–an iconic image of the individual scientist. Historically, this has been a fitting icon for scientific research in cognitive science domains including philosophy and psychology. However, this ideal is increasingly difficult to achieve in many academic disciplines, and particularly in the field of cognitive neuroscience where the mastery of multiple domains often exceeds the ability of any one individual. The result is an increase in collaborative efforts where responsibility is distributed among a research team. There is, however, an emerging development in cognitive neuroscience. In a new form of collaboration, the academic researcher performing functional neuroimaging can outsource data analysis to commercial companies. Whereas outsourcing might be suitable for some analysis situations, for others it raises important considerations for granting agencies and peer-review policies, and in certain instances can be a disservice to the research enterprise. Although for cognitive neuroscientists outsourcing can be a byproduct of the demands of complex investigations, it is common in other academic fields. Certain biomedical fields, including neuroscience, have outsourced time-consuming procedures that are transparent and/or amenable to standardization (eg gene sequencing, tissue analysis and identification of molecular compounds). In such cases outsourcing enables access to knowledgeable analysts, advanced methodologies and expensive equipment. This allows the investigator to remain at the forefront of scientific trends, to maintain several different projects in the research pipeline and to complete projects more quickly. These benefits are now available to neuroimagers. Outsourcing companies provide an array of neuroimaging services for both academic and for private industry clients (eg pharmaceutical companies). These services range from low-level image conversion to intermediate pre-processing steps to complete prefabricated analysis pipelines (Table 1). Outsourcing, however, can also have negative implications. The degree of negative impact depends on the degree to which the researcher transfers control [1], which in turn depends on the nature of the outsourcing relationship. In essence, outsourcing neuroimaging data analysis lies on a continuum from obtaining consultation to contracting out the research effort itself. The latter obviously represents a loss of control over the analysis process (Box 1).On this point, lessons can be learned from services offered within academic institutions themselves. Universities have realized that scientists need analysis support in data intensive domains, and several centers provide biostatistical consultancy services (eg the Biomedical Research Informatics Core at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center; the Center for Biostatistics at The Ohio State University). Although these are ‘in house’services, their policies highlight the delicate balance between control and delegation of authority that accompanies external assistance. Such centers typically offer two service tracks:(a) general consulting, eg low-level analysis with minimal conceptual input, which often does not warrant co-authorship; or (b) support that constitutes ‘scientific or intellectual contribution’in which case authorship is warranted [2, 3; see sample policies: The Ohio State University, Center for Biostatistics, Manuscript preparation (http://tinyurl. com/nkltdy); Vanderbilt University, Department of Biostatistics, Policies for manuscript writing (http://tinyurl. com/ntkaz7)]. Scientific or intellectual contributions include input to the study design or protocol, and planning or execution of analysis [4]. To summarize …
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
MacKenzie-Graham, Allan J.;Van Horn, John D.;Toga, Arthur W.
通讯作者：
Toga, Arthur W.
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Geissler, A;Lanzenberger, R;Beisteiner, R
通讯作者：
Beisteiner, R
影响因子：
1.8
作者：
Gullion, CM;Berman, N
通讯作者：
Berman, N
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Devlin, Joseph T.;Poldrack, Russell A.
通讯作者：
Poldrack, Russell A.
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Fox, Michael D.;Zhang, Dongyang;Raichle, Marcus E.
通讯作者：
Raichle, Marcus E.