Standardizing bioresources citation in journal articles: workshop highlights
Sharing of resources such as biobanks and databases is an essential part of biomedical research as it enhances knowledge production. Due to this there is a rising requirement “to improve access should be complemented with efforts of end-users to recognize and acknowledge these resources”. In order to develop a set of tools that will help efficient sharing, and determining the impact of biobanks and databases an indicator was created and named: Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF). The BRIF work has been divided in subgroups: ’BRIF identifiers’; ’BRIF parameters’; ’BRIF in access and sharing policies’; ’BRIF dissemination’ and ’BRIF and journal editors’ so as to expand sharing and circulation of bioresources and their content through the development of specific tools.
An objective of BRIF is to make groups conscious of “specific issues related to bioresources, creating awareness on the BRIF project and, possibly, proceed to amend editorial guidelines by including reference to bioresources is essential”. So far, actions have been directed to: the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the European Association of Science Editors (EASE). The ICMJE advised to contact also the EQUATOR network (a repository of reporting guidelines), while COPE agreed to discuss a declaration of openness for promoting specific guidelines. Additionally, EASE Council members agreed on including the subgroup proposed sentence in the updated version of the Guidelines, available at www.ease.org.uk/publications/author-guidelines, to encourage citation of the bioresources with their name or identifier.
A workshop titled “Standardizing Bioresources Citation In Journal Articles: The Editors Point Of View” was held in Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, on 21 June, 2013. The objective of this workshop was to "elaborate practical and realistic proposals for harmonising bioresources citation in journal articles with the help of journal editors". Presentations from the editor of PLOS Biology, COPE, EASE, provided information on creating reliable, comprehensive citation metrics, as well as other methods, to demonstrate the impact of a bioresource. During the workshop the proposal to identify bioresources using a persistent code (ID) rather than the name to avoid confusions, the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) system so that bioresources could be tracked through CrossRef, a properly referenceable bioresource was emphasised. Other suggestions such as create a new MESH (Medical Subject Heading) term for bioresources and the NLM Citing Medicine to include a standard citation for bioresources was also floated.
Finally the opportunity to present some considerations about the BRIF and Journal editors subgroup activity at the “European Commission Public Consultation on Open Research Data” at Brussels on July 2, 2013 was also contemplated.
Learn more about BRIF
Read the open access article on BRIF
A research paper published in Molecular Genetics and Metabolism explored experiences of Fabry disease (FD) patients’ with the timing of their diagnosis and tried to identify the potentially important patient-oriented themes relevant to discussions about the need for newborn screening (NBS) for this disorder. The study identified themes that reflect both the phenotypic heterogeneity of the disease and the substantial differences between patients’ experiences with and without FD symptoms before diagnosis and among the patients in each group. 
The authors of an article published in Oncogene believe that the next few years to be promising for collaboration between academia and industry for rare and childhood cancers especially for rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS). The authors believe that the "growing understanding of sarcoma tumor biology, synergy with pharmaceutical muscle disease drug-development programs, and emerging publicly available preclinical and clinical tools, makes the outlook for academic–community–industry partnerships in RMS drug development looks promising. 
A new study published in Frontline Gastroenterol examines colorectal cancer screening in the UK. The authors tried to assess whether these patients are “screened appropriately for Lynch syndrome, in accordance with current international guidance”. The authors identified and reviewed 553 patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer over an 18-month period were from the UK National Bowel Cancer Audit Programme. They compared the clinical history of screened patients with unscreened patients and found that, 97 patients(17.5%) fulfilled the revised Bethesda criteria. However only 22 of the 97 patients underwent evaluation of which 14 corroborated a diagnosis of Lynch syndrome. The authors also point that out of these 14 only 9 received a referral for mismatch repair gene testing. 
