{"doi":"10.1093/ajh/hpae153","title":"Factors Associated With Discussing High Blood Pressure Readings in Clinical Notes","abstract":"BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) is routinely measured and recorded at healthcare visits, but high BP (HBP) measurements are not always discussed in clinical notes. Our objective was to identify patient- and visit-level factors associated with discussion of HBP measurements in clinical notes, among patients without prior diagnosis of hypertension. METHODS: Data from 2016 to 2022 for all patients with any BP record of 140/90 mmHg or greater were obtained from University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics electronic medical records. Patients with any prior hypertension diagnosis were excluded. We used a multi-level regression model to evaluate differences in the rates of discussing HBP. The model included varying intercepts for visit specialty and non-varying slopes and intercepts for patient- and visit-level features. RESULTS: The final sample included 278,766 outpatient visits for 27,423 patients, of which 61,739 visits had HBP. Only 31% of visits with HBP had associated clinical notes with a discussion of HBP. Even in primary-care-related clinics, HBP measurements were discussed in only 70% of visits. Factors associated with decreased odds of HBP being discussed in clinical notes included fever (OR: 0.46; 95%CI: 0.24-0.86) or external injury or pain (0.84; 0.79-0.90), and a larger number of comorbidities (6+: 0.27; 0.22-0.32). Discussion of HBP in clinical notes was more likely among visits of patients with prior visits where HBP was discussed in clinical notes (12.36; 11.75-13.01). CONCLUSIONS: We found that discussion of HBP is relatively uncommon. Increasing discussion of hypertension in clinical notes could decrease hypertension-related diagnostic inertia.","journal":"American Journal of Hypertension","year":2024,"id":466862,"datarank":0.24141568686511508,"base_score":1.6094379124341003,"endowment":1.6094379124341003,"self_citation_contribution":0.24141568686511508,"citation_network_contribution":0.0,"self_endowment_contribution":0.24141568686511508,"citer_contribution":0.0,"corpus_percentile":38.748356153786645,"corpus_rank":7799,"citation_count":4,"citer_count":2,"citers_with_citation_signal":0,"citers_with_endowment":0,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"is_dataset":true,"is_dataset_confidence":0.6894,"is_data_producer":false,"deposit_databanks":null,"is_oa":true,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"has_version_chain":false,"published_date":"2024-01-01","fair_score":4.1667,"fair_percentile":4.891470498318557,"algorithm_id":"datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6","ranking_scope":"data_only","authors":[{"id":422171,"name":"Philip M. Polgreen","orcid":"0000-0002-0630-5898","position":1,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1120724,"name":"Manish Suneja","orcid":"0000-0002-1613-8456","position":2,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":738984,"name":"Barry L. Carter","orcid":"0000-0002-0466-343X","position":3,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":435670,"name":"Linnea A. Polgreen","orcid":"0000-0002-3926-5933","position":4,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":834586,"name":"Cole G. Chapman","orcid":"0000-0002-1132-3767","position":0,"is_corresponding":true}],"reference_count":29,"raw_metadata":null,"created_at":"2026-07-19T02:05:06.743102Z","pmid":"39661402","pmcid":"PMC11911316","fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"oa_status":null,"license":null,"views":0,"total_file_size_bytes":0,"version_count":0,"fair_f":11.1111,"fair_a":0.0,"fair_i":0.0,"fair_r":8.3333,"fair_zscore":-1.1986,"fair_rationale":{"fair_score":4.17,"has_llm":true,"taxonomy_version":"fair_taxonomy_v5","dimensions":{"F":{"name":"Findable","score":11.11,"criteria":[{"key":"f_dataset_pid","label":"Persistent identifier for the data","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No persistent identifier is given for the dataset.","anchors":["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'"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"f_repository_named","label":"Named repository","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No repository is named as holding the data.","anchors":["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"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"f_data_availability_statement","label":"Data-availability statement","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":"For patient privacy reasons, research data cannot be shared.","grounded":true,"rationale":"The data availability statement declares data cannot be shared, offering no route.","anchors":["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"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"f_discovery_metadata","label":"Description of the dataset as an object","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":0.5,"verdict":"partial","evidence":"The final sample included 278,766 outpatient visits for 27,423 patients, of which 61,739 visits had HBP.","grounded":true,"rationale":"The paper states the size of the dataset in running prose, but provides no itemised inventory. [majority verdict 'partial' (3/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["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'"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"f_dataset_cited","label":"Dataset formally cited","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No dataset identifier appears anywhere in the paper.","anchors":["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'"],"scored":true,"signal":null}]},"A":{"name":"Accessible","score":0.0,"criteria":[{"key":"a_data_openly_accessible","label":"Access route free of preconditions","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":"For patient privacy reasons, research data cannot be shared.","grounded":true,"rationale":"The paper explicitly states data cannot be shared, so no route to access.","anchors":["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'"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"a_access_conditions_stated","label":"Access level labelled","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":"For patient privacy reasons, research data cannot be shared.","grounded":true,"rationale":"The paper states that data cannot be shared, but does not label the access level.","anchors":["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"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"a_controlled_access_for_sensitive","label":"Gatekeeper for sensitive data","kind":"llm","weight":0.5,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":"For patient privacy reasons, research data cannot be shared.","grounded":true,"rationale":"The paper states data cannot be shared and names no gatekeeper.","anchors":["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"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"a_timeline_retention","label":"Availability timing & retention","kind":"llm","weight":0.5,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No sentence mentions retention or availability timing.","anchors":["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'"],"scored":false,"signal":null}]},"I":{"name":"Interoperable","score":0.0,"criteria":[{"key":"i_open_nonproprietary_format","label":"Open file format","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No file format is named for the released data.","anchors":["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"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"i_community_standard_vocabulary","label":"Community standard / vocabulary","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No community data or metadata standard is named for the released data. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["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'"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"i_qualified_references","label":"Identifiers for the resources the data depend on","kind":"llm","weight":0.5,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No identifier for any external resource is given.","anchors":["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'"],"scored":false,"signal":null}]},"R":{"name":"Reusable","score":8.33,"criteria":[{"key":"r_reuse_license","label":"Reuse licence","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No licence is named for the data.","anchors":["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'"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"r_provenance_methods","label":"Provenance of the data","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No specific instrument or software used to produce the data is named; the EMR system is not named specifically. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["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"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"r_documentation_codebook","label":"Documentation / codebook","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No documentation object is named for the data. [majority verdict 'no' (3/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["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"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"r_versioning","label":"Snapshot identified","kind":"llm","weight":0.5,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No version token or date for the dataset is given.","anchors":["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'"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"x_code_availability","label":"Analysis code available","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No code location is provided.","anchors":["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)"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"x_funding_attribution","label":"Funder and award number","kind":"llm","weight":0.5,"fraction":1.0,"verdict":"yes","evidence":"This work was supported in part by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (#HL144880 to LAP) and the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (#UL1TR004403 to PMP).","grounded":true,"rationale":"The paper provides grant numbers for funding. [majority verdict 'yes' (4/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["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"],"scored":true,"signal":null}]}},"actions":[{"key":"f_dataset_pid","dimension":"F","label":"Persistent identifier for the data","action":"Mint or cite a persistent identifier for the dataset — a repository DOI or an accession from a registered repository — and print it in the paper. A bare URL is not persistent: it is the single most common cause of a dead data link five years after publication. For clinical / human-subjects data, deposit in dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA).","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No persistent identifier is given for the dataset.","gain":16.67,"priority":"essential","scored":true},{"key":"f_repository_named","dimension":"F","label":"Named repository","action":"Deposit the data in a repository registered in re3data/FAIRsharing (a domain repository such as GEO, SRA, dbGaP, PRIDE, or a generalist such as Zenodo, Dryad, Dataverse) and name it explicitly in the paper. A lab website is not an archive: it has no retention commitment and no accession. For clinical / human-subjects data, deposit in dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA).","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No repository is named as holding the data.","gain":16.67,"priority":"essential","scored":true},{"key":"a_data_openly_accessible","dimension":"A","label":"Access route free of preconditions","action":"Remove the precondition or justify it. Release the data at publication with no embargo, no registration wall, and no approval step — NIH's zero-embargo public- access rule (NOT-OD-25-101) has already made 'available at publication' the federal baseline for the article; the data should not lag behind it. For clinical / human-subjects data, deposit in dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA).","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":"For patient privacy reasons, research data cannot be shared.","why":"The paper explicitly states data cannot be shared, so no route to access.","gain":16.67,"priority":"essential","scored":true},{"key":"r_reuse_license","dimension":"R","label":"Reuse licence","action":"Attach a standard, machine-readable open licence to the deposit — CC0 or CC BY, which is what Horizon Europe and most funders expect — and print the licence identifier in the paper. 'Free to use' is not a licence: it grants nothing a reuser's institution can rely on.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No licence is named for the data.","gain":16.67,"priority":"essential","scored":true},{"key":"f_dataset_cited","dimension":"F","label":"Dataset formally cited","action":"Cite the dataset in the reference list like a publication — creator, year, title, repository, DOI/accession — and cite it in-text where it is used. Only a reference- list entry is machine-readable to Crossref/DataCite, and only a citation lets the data earn credit. Cite the clinical / human-subjects repository accession (e.g. from dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA)) in the reference list.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No dataset identifier appears anywhere in the paper.","gain":8.33,"priority":"important","scored":true},{"key":"i_open_nonproprietary_format","dimension":"I","label":"Open file format","action":"Release the data in an open, community-standard format (CSV/TSV, JSON, HDF5, NetCDF, FASTQ, VCF, NIfTI…) instead of — or alongside — any proprietary or instrument-native format, and name the format in the paper. A dataset that needs a €2,000 licence to open is not reusable.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No file format is named for the released data.","gain":8.33,"priority":"important","scored":true},{"key":"x_code_availability","dimension":"R","label":"Analysis code available","action":"Publish the analysis code in a public forge, archive a tagged release with a DOI (Zenodo/Software Heritage), and cite that DOI in the paper. NIH DMS Element 2 asks for the tools and code, not only the data — and 'available on request' is not a locator. Archive the analysis code in a versioned repository (GitHub + a Zenodo release DOI).","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No code location is provided.","gain":8.33,"priority":"important","scored":true},{"key":"r_versioning","dimension":"R","label":"Snapshot identified","action":"Version the deposit and cite the exact version analysed (a version-specific DOI, or an accession with its version suffix). A reader reproducing your work against 'the current release' is reproducing it against a different dataset.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No version token or date for the dataset is given.","gain":4.17,"priority":"useful","scored":true},{"key":"f_data_availability_statement","dimension":"F","label":"Data-availability statement","action":"Replace the statement with the repository template: name the repository and give the accession or DOI (Colavizza category 3). This is the only DAS class associated with a measured citation advantage; 'available on reasonable request' and 'within the article' are not.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":"For patient privacy reasons, research data cannot be shared.","why":"The data availability statement declares data cannot be shared, offering no route.","gain":0.0,"priority":"essential","scored":false},{"key":"f_discovery_metadata","dimension":"F","label":"Description of the dataset as an object","action":"Add a 'Data Records' section: itemise every file in the deposit and every variable or sample it holds, with counts and units. Describe the dataset as an object in its own right, not as a by-product of the findings — this is what makes it discoverable to someone who is not looking for your paper.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"partial","current":0.5,"evidence":"The final sample included 278,766 outpatient visits for 27,423 patients, of which 61,739 visits had HBP.","why":"The paper states the size of the dataset in running prose, but provides no itemised inventory. [majority verdict 'partial' (3/5 passes agreed)]","gain":0.0,"priority":"essential","scored":false},{"key":"a_access_conditions_stated","dimension":"A","label":"Access level labelled","action":"State the access level in words, using the standard vocabulary: 'These data are open access' / 'These data are controlled access'. A reader — and a harvester — should not have to infer the access level from the presence of a download link.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":"For patient privacy reasons, research data cannot be shared.","why":"The paper states that data cannot be shared, but does not label the access level.","gain":0.0,"priority":"important","scored":false},{"key":"i_community_standard_vocabulary","dimension":"I","label":"Community standard / vocabulary","action":"Adopt and NAME your domain's data standard — the minimum-information checklist, metadata schema, or ontology your community uses (MIAME/MINSEQE, ISA-Tab, BIDS, an OBO ontology, HL7 FHIR/OMOP) — and say which one you followed. A reporting checklist standardises your paper; it does nothing for your data. In clinical / human-subjects, describe the data with OMOP CDM, CDISC SDTM or HL7 FHIR.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No community data or metadata standard is named for the released data. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]","gain":0.0,"priority":"important","scored":false},{"key":"r_provenance_methods","dimension":"R","label":"Provenance of the data","action":"Name the instruments, kits, and software — with versions — that produced the data, not just the verbs. 'Reads were aligned' is not provenance; 'aligned with STAR v2.7.9a to GRCh38' is, because someone else can rerun it.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No specific instrument or software used to produce the data is named; the EMR system is not named specifically. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]","gain":0.0,"priority":"important","scored":false},{"key":"r_documentation_codebook","dimension":"R","label":"Documentation / codebook","action":"Ship a README and a data dictionary IN the deposit — every file, every variable, its units, its allowed values, its missing-value codes. It is the cheapest single thing that makes a dataset usable by someone who was not in the lab, and a table buried in the article does not travel with the data.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No documentation object is named for the data. [majority verdict 'no' (3/5 passes agreed)]","gain":0.0,"priority":"important","scored":false},{"key":"a_controlled_access_for_sensitive","dimension":"A","label":"Gatekeeper for sensitive data","action":"Route sensitive data through an institutional gatekeeper — deposit in a controlled- access repository (dbGaP, EGA) with a Data Access Committee and a published DUA — rather than through the corresponding author's inbox. An author-gated dataset dies with the author's email address, and 'on reasonable request' has been shown repeatedly not to yield data. For sensitive/human clinical / human-subjects data, use a controlled-access repository such as dbGaP or EGA.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":"For patient privacy reasons, research data cannot be shared.","why":"The paper states data cannot be shared and names no gatekeeper.","gain":0.0,"priority":"useful","scored":false},{"key":"i_qualified_references","dimension":"I","label":"Identifiers for the resources the data depend on","action":"Cite by identifier every resource the data depend on — the source datasets' accessions, the reference build (GRCh38 / GCA_000001405.28), the cohort application number, the code DOI — and register those relations on the dataset record (IsDerivedFrom, IsSupplementTo). A name is not a link: it cannot be resolved, versioned, or followed by a machine.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No identifier for any external resource is given.","gain":0.0,"priority":"useful","scored":false},{"key":"a_timeline_retention","dimension":"A","label":"Availability timing & retention","action":"State when the data become available AND how long they will be retained — cite the repository's preservation policy. NIH DMS Element 4 asks for both; most papers give neither.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No sentence mentions retention or availability timing.","gain":0.0,"priority":"useful","scored":false}],"suggestions":["Mint or cite a persistent identifier for the dataset — a repository DOI or an accession from a registered repository — and print it in the paper. A bare URL is not persistent: it is the single most common cause of a dead data link five years after publication. For clinical / human-subjects data, deposit in dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA).","Deposit the data in a repository registered in re3data/FAIRsharing (a domain repository such as GEO, SRA, dbGaP, PRIDE, or a generalist such as Zenodo, Dryad, Dataverse) and name it explicitly in the paper. A lab website is not an archive: it has no retention commitment and no accession. For clinical / human-subjects data, deposit in dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA).","Remove the precondition or justify it. Release the data at publication with no embargo, no registration wall, and no approval step — NIH's zero-embargo public- access rule (NOT-OD-25-101) has already made 'available at publication' the federal baseline for the article; the data should not lag behind it. For clinical / human-subjects data, deposit in dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA).","Attach a standard, machine-readable open licence to the deposit — CC0 or CC BY, which is what Horizon Europe and most funders expect — and print the licence identifier in the paper. 'Free to use' is not a licence: it grants nothing a reuser's institution can rely on.","Cite the dataset in the reference list like a publication — creator, year, title, repository, DOI/accession — and cite it in-text where it is used. Only a reference- list entry is machine-readable to Crossref/DataCite, and only a citation lets the data earn credit. Cite the clinical / human-subjects repository accession (e.g. from dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA)) in the reference list."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash","agent_version":"fair_agent_v8","fulltext_source":"epmc_xml"},"fair_model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash","fair_agent_version":"fair_agent_v8","fair_fulltext_source":"epmc_xml","fair_has_llm":true,"fair_computed_at":"2026-07-20T13:03:19.656380Z","clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"db_accessions":[],"linked_datasets":[],"topics":[]}