Finding Long-COVID: temporal topic modeling of electronic health records from the N3C and RECOVER programs is a dataset published in npj Digital Medicine (2024). On theSindex it has a DataRank of 0.397, placing it in the top 46.1% of the data-sharing corpus. It has been cited 8 times, with 8 citing works in its 1-hop citation network. Its calibrated FAIR score is 8/100.
Ranks in the top 46% for downstream scientific impact
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's own dataset (the topic‑model outputs and statistical results) is not assigned any persistent identifier; the article's DOI is for the paper, not the data.
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'
No repository is named as the holder of the study's own data; the supplementary materials are part of the article, not deposited in a separate repository. [majority verdict 'no' (3/5 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 anywhere in the paper, either in the body text or in the reference list. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]
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 N3C Data Enclave is managed under the authority of the NIH; information can be found at https://ncats.nih.gov/n3c/resources. N3C data are protected, and can be accessed for COVID-related research with an approved (1) IRB protocol and (2) Data Use Request for study RP-5677B5. Enclave and data access instructions can be found at https://covid.cd2h.org/for-researchers.”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The data‑availability statement refers only to the source N3C data, not to the study's own results (which are in the supplementary materials). No DAS exists for the study's own dataset. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]
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 complete list of significant results is available in Supplementary Table 4.”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The dataset's content is described in a running‑prose sentence, not in an itemised inventory section or table caption. [downgraded to 'no' — no verifiable quote from the paper]
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 paper does not provide an unconditional access route to its own dataset; it only describes controlled access to the N3C data. [majority verdict 'no' (3/5 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 paper does not label the access level of its own dataset; it only describes the access conditions for the underlying N3C data. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]
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's own data (aggregated results in supplementary tables) are not sensitive; no gatekeeper is named for them. [majority verdict 'no' (3/5 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 complete list of significant results is available in Supplementary Table 4.”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The paper states that the data are available now (in the supplementary table) but makes no commitment to how long they will persist. [downgraded to 'no' — no verifiable quote from the paper]
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'
No file format of any kind is named for the study's own data (the supplementary tables).
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
“N3C multi-site EHR data are harmonized to the OMOP common data model.”
The paper uses the OMOP common data model, a community standard, for the data. [majority verdict 'yes' (3/5 passes agreed)]
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'
“Analysis code is available for review at https://github.com/oneilsh/lda_pasc.”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The paper provides a URL for the analysis code, which is an identifier for a resource other than the dataset itself. [downgraded to 'no' — no verifiable quote from the paper] [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]
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 does not apply a license to its own dataset; the article license does not cover the data. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]
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 dataset. [majority verdict 'no' (3/5 passes agreed)]
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'
“Analysis code is available for review at https://github.com/oneilsh/lda_pasc”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The paper provides a machine‑resolvable URL to a code repository for the study's own code. [downgraded to 'partial' — no verifiable quote from the paper]
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)
“NCATS U24 TR002306”
The paper gives an award/grant number (NCATS U24 TR002306) attached to a named funder. [majority verdict 'yes' (4/5 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
“We therefore adopted the online LDA method described by Hoffman et al., implemented in Apache Spark version 3.2.1, with a 5% batch size and 10 iterations over the data (maxIter = 200, subsamplingRate = 0.05, seed = 42).”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The paper names specific software and versions used to produce the data. [downgraded to 'partial' — no verifiable quote from the paper] [majority verdict 'partial' (3/5 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
“The complete list of significant results is available in Supplementary Table 4.”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The variable definitions are inside the article (the table itself), not in a separate documentation object shipped with the data. [downgraded to 'no' — no verifiable quote from the paper]
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
0.330
From this paper's citation signal
Citation Network Contribution
0.0669
From 4 citing papers with measurable signal
Ranked by each citer's contribution to N(p) — log1p(Cq) divided by its reference count — out of 8 citers.
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Grant: TR002306
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Grant: OT2HL161847-01
FWCI
1.80
Citation Percentile
0.9%
Citation Trend
Fields of Study
Keywords