Deciphering the causal relationship between blood pressure and regional white matter integrity: A two‐sample Mendelian randomization study is a dataset published in Journal of Neuroscience Research (2023). On theSindex it has a DataRank of 0.386, placing it in the top 47% of the data-sharing corpus. It has been cited 9 times, with 3 citing works in its 1-hop citation network. Its calibrated FAIR score is 2/100.
Ranks in the top 47% for downstream scientific impact
Linked data & code
DataRank reads this dataset's downstream impact straight off the citation graph — no black box, no proprietary weighting. How is this computed?
FAIR checklist signals are shown for context only and do not affect DataRank scoring.
Full FAIR picture · advisory
The headline score is computed from the scored criteria — the fact-shaped checks (a repository, an accession, a licence) that two independent models agree on. The advisory criteria below are real FAIR guidance but rest on judgment calls that models read differently, so they inform without moving the number.
The paper does not provide a PID (DOI, Handle, ARK, accession) for the study's own data; the article DOI is for the paper itself.
RDA-F1-01D — FAIR Data Maturity Model: 'Data is identified by a persistent identifier' (priorit · RDA-F1-02D — FAIR Data Maturity Model: 'Data is identified by a globally unique identifier' · FsF-F1-02D — F-UJI/FAIRsFAIR: 'Data is assigned a persistent identifier'
The paper names UK Biobank as the source of the raw data, but not as a repository holding the study's own data; no repository is named for the study's own generated data. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]
RDA-F4-01M — FAIR Data Maturity Model: metadata is offered so it can be harvested and indexed ( · NIH DMS Policy Element 4 (NOT-OD-21-014) — name the repository where data will be archived · NSTC Desirable Characteristics of Data Repositories (2022) — 'Long-Term Sustainability', 'Reten
No identifier for the study's own dataset appears in the reference list or body text; the only identifiers are for external resources (UK Biobank, IEU OpenGWAS).
FORCE11 Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles (2014) — data should be cited as a first- · RDA-F3-01M — metadata clearly and explicitly includes the identifier of the data it describes · FsF-F3-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes the identifier of the data it describes'
Advisory · not in the published score
“The raw genetic and phenotypic data used in the current study are available from the UK Biobank (UKB), which can be accessed via https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/.”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The data availability statement exists but refers to the source data (UK Biobank), not to the study's own generated data. The statement does not point to a repository record for the study's own data.
Colavizza, Hrynaszkiewicz, Staden, Whitaker & McGillivray (2020), 'The citation advantage of li · Springer Nature research data policy — Data Availability Statements: standard statement templat · RDA-F3-01M — metadata clearly and explicitly includes the identifier of the data it describes
The paper does not include an itemised inventory (section, table, list) describing the files, variables, or samples of the study's own data; the methods describe the analysis but not the released dataset. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]
RDA-F2-01M — 'Rich metadata is provided to allow discovery' (priority Essential) · FsF-F2-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes descriptive core elements to support data findability' · FsF-R1-01MD — F-UJI: 'Metadata specifies the content of the data'
The study's own data (the analysis results) are not deposited or made available; the only access route described is for the raw UK Biobank data, not for the study's own data. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]
RDA-A1.1-01D — 'Data is accessible through a free access protocol' · FsF-A1-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata contains access level and access conditions of the data' · NSTC Desirable Characteristics of Data Repositories (2022) — 'Free and Easy Access'
Advisory · not in the published score
“The raw genetic and phenotypic data used in the current study are available from the UK Biobank (UKB), which can be accessed via https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/.”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The data availability statement points to UK Biobank for the raw data used, but this is not a label of the access level for the study's own data (the analysis results). The study's own data are not labeled with any access condition.
FsF-A1-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata contains access level and access conditions of the data' · RDA-A1-01M — metadata contains information to enable the user to get access to the data · COAR Controlled Vocabularies — Access Rights v1.0 (open / embargoed / restricted / metadata-onl
The study uses human data from UK Biobank, but the study's own data (the analysis results) are not accessible via any gatekeeper; no institutional or personal gatekeeper is named for the study's own data. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]
NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy (NOT-OD-14-124) — controlled-access via a Data Access Committee · RDA-A1.2-01D — 'Data is accessible through an access protocol that supports authentication and · NIH DMS Policy Element 5 (NOT-OD-21-014) — Access, Distribution, or Reuse Considerations (conse
The paper does not state a retention period or timeline for the study's own data; the raw data are in UK Biobank but that is not the study's own data.
NIH DMS Plan Element 4 (NOT-OD-21-014) — Data Preservation, Access, and Associated Timelines · NSTC Desirable Characteristics (2022), Organizational Infrastructure: 'Retention Policy' · RDA-A2-01M — 'Metadata is guaranteed to remain available after data is no longer available'
The study's own data are not released; no file format is named for the study's own data.
FsF-R1.3-02D — F-UJI: 'Data is available in a file format recommended by the target research co · RDA-R1.3-02D — data is expressed in a machine-understandable community standard · RDA-I1-01D — data uses a knowledge representation expressed in a standardised format
Advisory · not in the published score
The paper mentions the ENIGMA protocol for processing, but this is a community standard for the analysis, not a data or metadata standard applied to the study's own data.
RDA-R1.3-01M — 'Metadata complies with a community standard' (priority Essential) · RDA-R1.3-01D — 'Data complies with a community standard' · RDA-I2-01M — '(Meta)data use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles'
“We downloaded this large meta-analyzed GWAS summary statistics for SBP [ https://gwas.mrcieu.ac.uk/datasets/ieu-b-38/ , accessed on June 13, 2022] and DBP [ https://gwas.mrcieu.ac.uk/datasets/ieu-b-39/ , accessed on June 13, 2022] from IEU OpenGWAS project”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The paper provides identifiers (URLs) for the GWAS summary data used, which are resources other than the study's own dataset. These identifiers are given in the text. [downgraded to 'no' — no verifiable quote from the paper]
RDA-I3-01M — '(meta)data include references to other (meta)data' · RDA-I3-03M — 'metadata includes qualified references to other metadata' · FsF-I3-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes links between the data and its related entities'
The paper includes a Creative Commons Attribution License for the article itself, but no license is specified for the study's own data.
RDA-R1.1-01M — 'Metadata includes information about the licence under which the data can be reu · RDA-R1.1-02M — 'Metadata refers to a standard reuse licence' · RDA-R1.1-03M — 'Metadata refers to a machine-understandable reuse licence'
No version token or date is given for the study's own data; the data are not deposited or versioned.
DataCite Metadata Schema 4.6 — the 'Version' property · RDA-R1.2-01M — provenance information (which version was used is provenance) · NSTC Desirable Characteristics of Data Repositories (2022) — 'Provenance', 'Retention Policy'
The paper does not mention availability of the study's own code; only third-party tools are named.
NIH DMS Policy Element 2 (NOT-OD-21-014) — 'Related Tools, Software and/or Code' · FAIR4RS Principles v1.0 (Chue Hong et al., 2022; RDA/FORCE11/ReSA) — FAIR Principles for Resear · FORCE11 Software Citation Principles (Smith, Katz & Niemeyer, 2016, PeerJ CS 2:e86)
“National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) of National Institutes of Health under award number 1DP1DA048968-01, University of Maryland Grand Challenge grant, and the National Institutes of Health under award numbers R01MH123163, R01EB015611, and S10OD023696”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The paper provides specific grant numbers for the funding that supported the work. [downgraded to 'partial' — no verifiable quote from the paper] [majority verdict 'partial' (3/5 passes agreed)]
DataCite Metadata Schema 4.6 — 'FundingReference' property (funderName, funderIdentifier, award · Crossref Funder Registry — canonical funder identifiers for funding metadata · RDA-F2-01M — rich metadata provided to allow discovery (funding is part of the descriptive reco
Advisory · not in the published score
The paper describes the analytical methods but does not provide a production record for a dataset because no dataset is produced. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]
RDA-R1.2-01M — 'Metadata includes provenance information according to community- specific standa · FsF-R1.2-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes provenance information about data creation or generati · W3C PROV-O (W3C Recommendation, 2013) — the entity/activity/agent model of provenance
No documentation object (README, codebook, schema) is named as accompanying the study's own data; the study's own data are not deposited.
RDA-R1-01M — '(Meta)data are richly described with a plurality of accurate and relevant attribu · FsF-R1-01MD — F-UJI: 'Metadata specifies the content of the data' · NIH DMS Policy Element 3 (NOT-OD-21-014) — Standards (documentation and metadata to accompany t
Calibrated FAIR score — a parallel quality metric, independent of the DataRank citation score. See the full evaluation →
Base Score Contribution
0.345
From this paper's citation signal
Citation Network Contribution
0.0410
From 2 citing papers with measurable signal
Ranked by each citer's contribution to N(p) — log1p(Cq) divided by its reference count — out of 3 citers.
National Institutes of Health
Grant: 1DP1DA048968‐01
NIBIB NIH HHS
Grant: R01 EB015611
NIMH NIH HHS
Grant: RF1 MH123163
NIDA NIH HHS
Grant: DP1 DA048968
NIH HHS
Grant: S10 OD023696
NIA NIH HHS
Grant: P30 AG028747
University of Maryland
FWCI
1.50
Citation Percentile
0.8%
Citation Trend
Fields of Study
MeSH Terms
Keywords
Sustainable Development Goals