Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 May 5;12(9):e4404.
doi: 10.21769/BioProtoc.4404.

A System to Easily Manage Metadata in Biomedical Research Labs Based on Open-source Software

Affiliations

A System to Easily Manage Metadata in Biomedical Research Labs Based on Open-source Software

Manuel A Castro-Alamancos. Bio Protoc. .

Abstract

In most biomedical labs, researchers gather metadata (i.e., all details about the experimental data) in paper notebooks, spreadsheets, or, sometimes, electronic notebooks. When data analyses occur, the related details usually go into other notebooks or spreadsheets, and more metadata are available. The whole thing rapidly becomes very complex and disjointed, and keeping track of all these things can be daunting. Organizing all the relevant data and related metadata for analysis, publication, sharing, or deposit into archives can be time-consuming, difficult, and prone to errors. By having metadata in a centralized system that contains all details from the start, the process is greatly simplified. While lab management software is available, it can be costly and inflexible. The system described here is based on a popular, freely available, and open-source wiki platform. It provides a simple but powerful way for biomedical research labs to set up a metadata management system linking the whole research process. The system enhances efficiency, transparency, reliability, and rigor, which are key factors to improving reproducibility. The flexibility afforded by the system simplifies implementation of specialized lab requirements and future needs. The protocol presented here describes how to create the system from scratch, how to use it for gathering basic metadata, and provides a fully functional version for perusal by the reader. Graphical abstract: Lab Metadata Management System.

Keywords: Data; Database; Lab management; Metadata; Reproducibility; Rigor.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsThe author has no relationship with any of the companies mentioned.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Result of running the example wiki provided.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Aspect of the Struct Schema Assignments page, after making the associations.
None

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bandrowski A. E. and Martone M. E.(2016). RRIDs: A Simple Step toward Improving Reproducibility through Rigor and Transparency of Experimental Methods. Neuron 90(3): 434-436. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baxter M. G. and Burwell R. D.(2017). Promoting transparency and reproducibility in Behavioral Neuroscience: Publishing replications, registered reports, and null results. Behav Neurosci 131(4): 275-276. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Borghi J. A. and Van Gulick A. E.(2018). Data management and sharing in neuroimaging: Practices and perceptions of MRI researchers. PLoS One 13(7): e0200562. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Botker H. E., Hausenloy D., Andreadou I., Antonucci S., Boengler K., Davidson S. M., Deshwal S., Devaux Y., Di Lisa F., Di Sante M., et al. .(2018). Practical guidelines for rigor and reproducibility in preclinical and clinical studies on cardioprotection. Basic Res Cardiol 113(5): 39. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown A. W., Kaiser K. A. and Allison D. B.(2018). Issues with data and analyses: Errors, underlying themes, and potential solutions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 115(11): 2563-2570. - PMC - PubMed