Dataset Search Results

These processing and Pearson correlational scripts were developed to support the study that examined the correlational relationships between local journal authorship, local and external citation counts, full-text downloads, link-resolver clicks, and four global journal impact factor indices within an all-disciplines journal collection of 12,200 titles and six subject subsets at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) Library. This study shows strong correlations in the all-disciplines set and most subject subsets. Special processing scripts and web site dashboards were created, including Pearson correlational analysis scripts for reading values from relational databases and displaying tabular results. The raw data used in this analysis, in the form of relational database tables with multiple columns, is available at <a href="https://doi.org/10.13012/B2IDB-6810203_V1">https://doi.org/10.13012/B2IDB-6810203_V1</a>.

A set of cell-line entity mentions derived from an NERC dataset analyzing 900 synthetic biology articles published by the ACS. This data is associated with the Synthetic Biology Knowledge System repository (https://web.synbioks.org/). The data in this dataset are raw mentions from the NERC data.

This is a sentence-level parallel corpus in support of research on OCR quality. The source data comes from: (1) Project Gutenberg for human-proofread "clean" sentences; and, (2) HathiTrust Digital Library for the paired sentences with OCR errors. In total, this corpus contains 167,079 sentence pairs from 189 sampled books in four domains (i.e., agriculture, fiction, social science, world war history) published from 1793 to 1984. There are 36,337 sentences that have two OCR views paired with each clean version. In addition to sentence texts, this corpus also provides the location (i.e., sentence and chapter index) of each sentence in its belonging Gutenberg volume.

This dataset contains data from extreme-disagreement analysis described in paper “Aaron M. Cohen, Jodi Schneider, Yuanxi Fu, Marian S. McDonagh, Prerna Das, Arthur W. Holt, Neil R. Smalheiser, 2021, Fifty Ways to Tag your Pubtypes: Multi-Tagger, a Set of Probabilistic Publication Type and Study Design Taggers to Support Biomedical Indexing and Evidence-Based Medicine.” In this analysis, our team experts carried out an independent formal review and consensus process for extreme disagreements between MEDLINE indexing and model predictive scores. “Extreme disagreements” included two situations: (1) an abstract was MEDLINE indexed as a publication type but received low scores for this publication type, and (2) an abstract received high scores for a publication type but lacked the corresponding MEDLINE index term. “High predictive score” is defined as the top 100 high-scoring, and “low predictive score” is defined as the bottom 100 low-scoring. Three publication types were analyzed, which are CASE_CONTROL_STUDY, COHORT_STUDY, and CROSS_SECTIONAL_STUDY. Results were recorded in three Excel workbooks, named after the publication types: case_control_study.xlsx, cohort_study.xlsx, and cross_sectional_study.xlsx. The analysis shows that, when the tagger gave a high predictive score (>0.9) on articles that lacked a corresponding MEDLINE indexing term, independent review suggested that the model assignment was correct in almost all cases (CROSS_SECTIONAL_STUDY (99%), CASE_CONTROL_STUDY (94.9%), and COHORT STUDY (92.2%)). Conversely, when articles received MEDLINE indexing but model predictive scores were very low (<0.1), independent review suggested that the model assignment was correct in the majority of cases: CASE_CONTROL_STUDY (85.4%), COHORT STUDY (76.3%), and CROSS_SECTIONAL_STUDY (53.6%). Based on the extreme disagreement analysis, we identified a number of false-positives (FPs) and false-negatives (FNs). For case control study, there were 5 FPs and 14 FNs. For cohort study, there were 7 FPs and 22 FNs. For cross-sectional study, there were 1 FP and 45 FNs. We reviewed and grouped them based on patterns noticed, providing clues for further improving the models. This dataset reports the instances of FPs and FNs along with their categorizations.

This dataset contains all the code, notebooks, datasets used in the study conducted to measure the spatial accessibility of COVID-19 healthcare resources with a particular focus on Illinois, USA. Specifically, the dataset measures spatial access for people to hospitals and ICU beds in Illinois. The spatial accessibility is measured by the use of an enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2FCA) method (Luo & Qi, 2009), which is an outcome of interactions between demands (i.e, # of potential patients; people) and supply (i.e., # of beds or physicians). The result is a map of spatial accessibility to hospital beds. It identifies which regions need more healthcare resources, such as the number of ICU beds and ventilators. This notebook serves as a guideline of which areas need more beds in the fight against COVID-19. ## What's Inside A quick explanation of the components of the zip file * `COVID-19Acc.ipynb` is a notebook for calculating spatial accessibility and `COVID-19Acc.html` is an export of the notebook as HTML. * `Data` contains all of the data necessary for calculations: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * `Chicago_Network.graphml`/`Illinois_Network.graphml` are GraphML files of the OSMNX street networks for Chicago and Illinois respectively. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * `GridFile/` has hexagonal gridfiles for Chicago and Illinois &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * `HospitalData/` has shapefiles for the hospitals in Chicago and Illinois &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * `IL_zip_covid19/COVIDZip.json` has JSON file which contains COVID cases by zip code from IDPH &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * `PopData/` contains population data for Chicago and Illinois by census tract and zip code. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * `Result/` is where we write out the results of the spatial accessibility measures &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * `SVI/`contains data about the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) * `img/` contains some images and HTML maps of the hospitals (the notebook generates the maps) * `README.md` is the document you're currently reading! * `requirements.txt` is a list of Python packages necessary to use the notebook (besides Jupyter/IPython). You can install the packages with `python3 -m pip install -r requirements.txt`

Dataset to be for SocialMediaIE tutorial

Models and predictions for submission to TRAC - 2020 Second Workshop on Trolling, Aggression and Cyberbullying Our approach is described in our paper titled: Mishra, Sudhanshu, Shivangi Prasad, and Shubhanshu Mishra. 2020. “Multilingual Joint Fine-Tuning of Transformer Models for Identifying Trolling, Aggression and Cyberbullying at TRAC 2020.” In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Trolling, Aggression and Cyberbullying (TRAC-2020). The source code for training this model and more details can be found on our code repository: https://github.com/socialmediaie/TRAC2020 NOTE: These models are retrained for uploading here after our submission so the evaluation measures may be slightly different from the ones reported in the paper.

The XSEDE program manages the database of allocation awards for the portfolio of advanced research computing resources funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF). The database holds data for allocation awards dating to the start of the TeraGrid program in 2004 to present, with awards continuing through the end of the second XSEDE award in 2021. The project data include lead researcher and affiliation, title and abstract, field of science, and the start and end dates. Along with the project information, the data set includes resource allocation and usage data for each award associated with the project. The data show the transition of resources over a fifteen year span along with the evolution of researchers, fields of science, and institutional representation.

This second version (V2) provides additional data cleaning compared to V1, additional data collection (mainly to include data from 2019), and more metadata for nodes. Please see NETWORKv2README.txt for more detail.

The Cline Center Historical Phoenix Event Data covers the period 1945-2019 and includes 8.2 million events extracted from 21.2 million news stories. This data was produced using the state-of-the-art PETRARCH-2 software to analyze content from the New York Times (1945-2018), the BBC Monitoring's Summary of World Broadcasts (1979-2019), the Wall Street Journal (1945-2005), and the Central Intelligence Agency’s Foreign Broadcast Information Service (1995-2004). It documents the agents, locations, and issues at stake in a wide variety of conflict, cooperation and communicative events in the Conflict and Mediation Event Observations (CAMEO) ontology. The Cline Center produced these data with the generous support of Linowes Fellow and Faculty Affiliate Prof. Dov Cohen and help from our academic and private sector collaborators in the Open Event Data Alliance (OEDA). For details on the CAMEO framework, see: Schrodt, Philip A., Omür Yilmaz, Deborah J. Gerner, and Dennis Hermreck. "The CAMEO (conflict and mediation event observations) actor coding framework." In 2008 Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association. 2008. http://eventdata.parusanalytics.com/papers.dir/APSA.2005.pdf Gerner, D.J., Schrodt, P.A. and Yilmaz, O., 2012. Conflict and mediation event observations (CAMEO) Codebook. http://eventdata.parusanalytics.com/cameo.dir/CAMEO.Ethnic.Groups.zip For more information about PETRARCH and OEDA, see: http://openeventdata.org/

This data has tweets collected in paper Shubhanshu Mishra, Sneha Agarwal, Jinlong Guo, Kirstin Phelps, Johna Picco, and Jana Diesner. 2014. Enthusiasm and support: alternative sentiment classification for social movements on social media. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM conference on Web science (WebSci '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 261-262. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2615569.2615667 The data only contains tweet IDs and the corresponding enthusiasm and support labels by two different annotators.

Citation context annotation for papers citing retracted paper Matsuyama 2005 (RETRACTED: Matsuyama W, Mitsuyama H, Watanabe M, Oonakahara KI, Higashimoto I, Osame M, Arimura K. Effects of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on inflammatory markers in COPD. Chest. 2005 Dec 1;128(6):3817-27.), retracted in 2008 (Retraction in: Chest (2008) 134:4 (893) <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0012-3692(08)60339-6">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0012-3692(08)60339-6<a/> ). This is part of the supplemental data for Jodi Schneider, Di Ye, Alison Hill, and Ashley Whitehorn. "Continued Citation of a Fraudulent Clinical Trial Report, Eleven Years after it was retracted for Falsifying Data" [R&R under review with Scientometrics]. Overall we found 148 citations to the retracted paper from 2006 to 2019, However, this dataset does not include the annotations described in the 2015. in Ashley Fulton, Alison Coates, Marie Williams, Peter Howe, and Alison Hill. "Persistent citation of the only published randomized controlled trial of omega-3 supplementation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease six years after its retraction." Publications 3, no. 1 (2015): 17-26. In this dataset 70 new and newly found citations are listed: 66 annotated citations and 4 pending citations (non-annotated since we don't have full-text). "New citations" refer to articles published from March 25, 2014 to 2019, found in Google Scholar and Web of Science. "Newly found citations" refer articles published 2006-2013, found in Google Scholar and Web of Science, but not previously covered in Ashley Fulton, Alison Coates, Marie Williams, Peter Howe, and Alison Hill. "Persistent citation of the only published randomised controlled trial of omega-3 supplementation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease six years after its retraction." Publications 3, no. 1 (2015): 17-26. NOTES: This is Unicode data. Some publication titles & quotes are in non-Latin characters and they may contain commas, quotation marks, etc. FILES/FILE FORMATS Same data in two formats: 2006-2019-new-citation-contexts-to-Matsuyama.csv - Unicode CSV (preservation format only) 2006-2019-new-citation-contexts-to-Matsuyama.xlsx - Excel workbook (preferred format) ROW EXPLANATIONS 70 rows of data - one citing publication per row COLUMN HEADER EXPLANATIONS Note - processing notes Annotation pending - Y or blank Year Published - publication year ID - ID corresponding to the network analysis. See Ye, Di; Schneider, Jodi (2019): Network of First and Second-generation citations to Matsuyama 2005 from Google Scholar and Web of Science. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. <a href="https://doi.org/10.13012/B2IDB-1403534_V2">https://doi.org/10.13012/B2IDB-1403534_V2</a> Title - item title (some have non-Latin characters, commas, etc.) Official Translated Title - item title in English, as listed in the publication Machine Translated Title - item title in English, translated by Google Scholar Language - publication language Type - publication type (e.g., bachelor's thesis, blog post, book chapter, clinical guidelines, Cochrane Review, consumer-oriented evidence summary, continuing education journal article, journal article, letter to the editor, magazine article, Master's thesis, patent, Ph.D. thesis, textbook chapter, training module) Book title for book chapters - Only for a book chapter - the book title University for theses - for bachelor's thesis, Master's thesis, Ph.D. thesis - the associated university Pre/Post Retraction - "Pre" for 2006-2008 (means published before the October 2008 retraction notice or in the 2 months afterwards); "Post" for 2009-2019 (considered post-retraction for our analysis) Identifier where relevant - ISBN, Patent ID, PMID (only for items we considered hard to find/identify, e.g. those without a DOI-based URL) URL where available - URL, ideally a DOI-based URL Reference number/style - reference Only in bibliography - Y or blank Acknowledged - If annotated, Y, Not relevant as retraction not published yet, or N (blank otherwise) Positive / "Poor Research" (Negative) - P for positive, N for negative if annotated; blank otherwise Human translated quotations - Y or blank; blank means Google scholar was used to translate quotations for Translated Quotation X Specific/in passing (overall) - Specific if any of the 5 quotations are specific [aggregates Specific / In Passing (Quotation X)] Quotation 1 - First quotation (or blank) (includes non-Latin characters in some cases) Translated Quotation 1 - English translation of "Quotation 1" (or blank) Specific / In Passing (Quotation 1) - Specific if "Quotation 1" refers to methods or results of the Matsuyama paper (or blank) What is referenced from Matsuyama (Quotation 1) - Methods; Results; or Methods and Results - blank if "Quotation 1" not specific, no associated quotation, or not yet annotated Quotation 2 - Second quotation (includes non-Latin characters in some cases) Translated Quotation 2 - English translation of "Quotation 2" Specific / In Passing (Quotation 2) - Specific if "Quotation 2" refers to methods or results of the Matsuyama paper (or blank) What is referenced from Matsuyama (Quotation 2) - Methods; Results; or Methods and Results - blank if "Quotation 2" not specific, no associated quotation, or not yet annotated Quotation 3 - Third quotation (includes non-Latin characters in some cases) Translated Quotation 3 - English translation of "Quotation 3" Specific / In Passing (Quotation 3) - Specific if "Quotation 3" refers to methods or results of the Matsuyama paper (or blank) What is referenced from Matsuyama (Quotation 3) - Methods; Results; or Methods and Results - blank if "Quotation 3" not specific, no associated quotation, or not yet annotated Quotation 4 - Fourth quotation (includes non-Latin characters in some cases) Translated Quotation 4 - English translation of "Quotation 4" Specific / In Passing (Quotation 4) - Specific if "Quotation 4" refers to methods or results of the Matsuyama paper (or blank) What is referenced from Matsuyama (Quotation 4) - Methods; Results; or Methods and Results - blank if "Quotation 4" not specific, no associated quotation, or not yet annotated Quotation 5 - Fifth quotation (includes non-Latin characters in some cases) Translated Quotation 5 - English translation of "Quotation 5" Specific / In Passing (Quotation 5) - Specific if "Quotation 5" refers to methods or results of the Matsuyama paper (or blank) What is referenced from Matsuyama (Quotation 5) - Methods; Results; or Methods and Results - blank if "Quotation 5" not specific, no associated quotation, or not yet annotated Further Notes - additional notes

Human annotations of randomly selected judged documents from the AP 88-89, Robust 2004, WT10g, and GOV2 TREC collections. Seven annotators were asked to read documents in their entirety and then select up to ten terms they felt best represented the main topic(s) of the document. Terms were chosen from among a set sampled from the document in question and from related documents.

This dataset contains records of five years of interlibrary loan (ILL) transactions for the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library. It is for the materials lent to other institutions during period 2009-2013. It includes 169,890 transactions showing date; borrowing institution’s type, state and country; material format, imprint city, imprint country, imprint region, call number, language, local circulation count, ILL lending count, and OCLC holdings count. The dataset was generated putting together monthly ILL reports. Circulation and ILL lending fields were added from the ILS records. Borrower region and imprint region fields are created based on Title VI Region List. OCLC holdings field has been added from WorldCat records.

Dataset providing calculation of a Competition Index (CI) for Late Pleistocene carnivore guilds in Laos and Vietnam and their relationship to humans. Prey mass spectra, Prey focus masses, and prey class raw data can be used to calculate the CI following Hemmer (2004). Mass estimates were calculated for each species following Van Valkenburgh (1990). Full citations to methodological papers are included as relationships with other resources

This dataset was developed to create a census of sufficiently documented molecular biology databases to answer several preliminary research questions. Articles published in the annual Nucleic Acids Research (NAR) “Database Issues” were used to identify a population of databases for study. Namely, the questions addressed herein include: 1) what is the historical rate of database proliferation versus rate of database attrition?, 2) to what extent do citations indicate persistence?, and 3) are databases under active maintenance and does evidence of maintenance likewise correlate to citation? An overarching goal of this study is to provide the ability to identify subsets of databases for further analysis, both as presented within this study and through subsequent use of this openly released dataset.

This dataset presents a citation analysis and citation context analysis used in Linh Hoang, Frank Scannapieco, Linh Cao, Yingjun Guan, Yi-Yun Cheng, and Jodi Schneider. Evaluating an automatic data extraction tool based on the theory of diffusion of innovation. Under submission. We identified the papers that directly describe or evaluate RobotReviewer from the list of publications on the RobotReviewer website <http://www.robotreviewer.net/publications>, resulting in 6 papers grouped into 5 studies (we collapsed a conference and journal paper with the same title and authors into one study). We found 59 citing papers, combining results from Google Scholar on June 05, 2018 and from Scopus on June 23, 2018. We extracted the citation context around each citation to the RobotReviewer papers and categorized these quotes into emergent themes.

This lexicon is the expanded/enhanced version of the Moral Foundation Dictionary created by Graham and colleagues (Graham et al., 2013). Our Enhanced Morality Lexicon (EML) contains a list of 4,636 morality related words. This lexicon was used in the following paper - please cite this paper if you use this resource in your work. Rezapour, R., Shah, S., & Diesner, J. (2019). Enhancing the measurement of social effects by capturing morality. Proceedings of the 10th Workshop on Computational Approaches to Subjectivity, Sentiment and Social Media Analysis (WASSA). Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL), Minneapolis, MN. In addition, please consider citing the original MFD paper: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4">Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2013). Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 47, pp. 55-130)</a>.

This project investigates retraction indexing agreement among data sources: BCI, BIOABS, CCC, Compendex, Crossref, GEOBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, Retraction Watch, Scopus, and Web of Science Core. Post-retraction citation may be partly due to authors’ and publishers' challenges in systematically identifying retracted publications. To investigate retraction indexing quality, we investigate the agreement in indexing retracted publications between 11 database sources, restricting to their coverage, resulting in a union list of 85,392 unique items. We also discuss common errors in indexing retracted publications. Our results reveal low retraction indexing agreement scores, indicating that databases widely disagree on indexing retracted publications they cover, leading to a lack of consistency in what publications are identified as retracted. Our findings highlight the need for clear and standard practices in the curation and management of retracted publications. Pipeline code to get the result files can be found in the GitHub repository https://github.com/infoqualitylab/retraction-indexing-agreement in the ‘src’ file containing iPython notebooks: The ‘unionlist_completed-ria_2024-07-09.csv’ file has been redacted to remove proprietary data, as noted below in README.txt. Among our sources, data is openly available only for Crossref, PubMed, and Retraction Watch. FILE FORMATS: 1) unionlist_completed-ria_2024-07-09.csv - UTF-8 CSV file 2) README.txt - text file

Citation context annotation. This dataset is a second version (V2) and part of the supplemental data for Jodi Schneider, Di Ye, Alison Hill, and Ashley Whitehorn. (2020) "Continued post-retraction citation of a fraudulent clinical trial report, eleven years after it was retracted for falsifying data". Scientometrics. In press, DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03631-1 Publications were selected by examining all citations to the retracted paper Matsuyama 2005, and selecting the 35 citing papers, published 2010 to 2019, which do not mention the retraction, but which mention the methods or results of the retracted paper (called "specific" in Ye, Di; Hill, Alison; Whitehorn (Fulton), Ashley; Schneider, Jodi (2020): Citation context annotation for new and newly found citations (2006-2019) to retracted paper Matsuyama 2005. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. <a href="https://doi.org/10.13012/B2IDB-8150563_V1">https://doi.org/10.13012/B2IDB-8150563_V1</a> ). The annotated citations are second-generation citations to the retracted paper Matsuyama 2005 (RETRACTED: Matsuyama W, Mitsuyama H, Watanabe M, Oonakahara KI, Higashimoto I, Osame M, Arimura K. Effects of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on inflammatory markers in COPD. Chest. 2005 Dec 1;128(6):3817-27.), retracted in 2008 (Retraction in: Chest (2008) 134:4 (893) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0012-3692(08)60339-6). <b>OVERALL DATA for VERSION 2 (V2)</b> FILES/FILE FORMATS Same data in two formats: 2010-2019 SG to specific not mentioned FG.csv - Unicode CSV (preservation format only) - same as in V1 2010-2019 SG to specific not mentioned FG.xlsx - Excel workbook (preferred format) - same as in V1 Additional files in V2: 2G-possible-misinformation-analyzed.csv - Unicode CSV (preservation format only) 2G-possible-misinformation-analyzed.xlsx - Excel workbook (preferred format) <b>ABBREVIATIONS: </b> 2G - Refers to the second-generation of Matsuyama FG - Refers to the direct citation of Matsuyama (the one the second-generation item cites) <b>COLUMN HEADER EXPLANATIONS </b> File name: 2G-possible-misinformation-analyzed. Other column headers in this file have same meaning as explained in V1. The following are additional header explanations: Quote Number - The order of the quote (citation context citing the first generation article given in "FG in bibliography") in the second generation article (given in "2G article") Quote - The text of the quote (citation context citing the first generation article given in "FG in bibliography") in the second generation article (given in "2G article") Translated Quote - English translation of "Quote", automatically translation from Google Scholar Seriousness/Risk - Our assessment of the risk of misinformation and its seriousness 2G topic - Our assessment of the topic of the cited article (the second generation article given in "2G article") 2G section - The section of the citing article (the second generation article given in "2G article") in which the cited article(the first generation article given in "FG in bibliography") was found FG in bib type - The type of article (e.g., review article), referring to the cited article (the first generation article given in "FG in bibliography") FG in bib topic - Our assessment of the topic of the cited article (the first generation article given in "FG in bibliography") FG in bib section - The section of the cited article (the first generation article given in "FG in bibliography") in which the Matsuyama retracted paper was cited

Exhaustive species inventory of suburban wetland complex in northeast Ohio (Cuyahoga County).

The salt controversy is the public health debate about whether a population-level salt reduction is beneficial. This dataset covers 82 publications--14 systematic review reports (SRRs) and 68 primary study reports (PSRs)--addressing the effect of sodium intake on cerebrocardiovascular disease or mortality. These present a snapshot of the status of the salt controversy as of September 2014 according to previous work by epidemiologists: The reports and their opinion classification (for, against, and inconclusive) were from Trinquart et al. (2016) (Trinquart, L., Johns, D. M., & Galea, S. (2016). Why do we think we know what we know? A metaknowledge analysis of the salt controversy. International Journal of Epidemiology, 45(1), 251–260. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyv184 ), which collected 68 PSRs, 14 SRRs, 11 clinical guideline reports, and 176 comments, letters, or narrative reviews. Note that our dataset covers only the 68 PSRs and 14 SRRs from Trinquart et al. 2016, not the other types of publications, and it adds additional information noted below. This dataset can be used to construct the inclusion network and the co-author network of the 14 SRRs and 68 PSRs. A PSR is "included" in an SRR if it is considered in the SRR's evidence synthesis. Each included PSR is cited in the SRR, but not all references cited in an SRR are included in the evidence synthesis or PSRs. Based on which PSRs are included in which SRRs, we can construct the inclusion network. The inclusion network is a bipartite network with two types of nodes: one type represents SRRs, and the other represents PSRs. In an inclusion network, if an SRR includes a PSR, there is a directed edge from the SRR to the PSR. The attribute file (report_list.csv) includes attributes of the 82 reports, and the edge list file (inclusion_net_edges.csv) contains the edge list of the inclusion network. Notably, 11 PSRs have never been included in any SRR in the dataset. They are unused PSRs. If visualized with the inclusion network, they will appear as isolated nodes. We used a custom-made workflow (Fu, Y. (2022). Scopus author info tool (1.0.1) [Python]. https://github.com/infoqualitylab/Scopus_author_info_collection ) that uses the Scopus API and manual work to extract and disambiguate authorship information for the 82 reports. The author information file (salt_cont_author.csv) is the product of this workflow and can be used to compute the co-author network of the 82 reports. We also provide several other files in this dataset. We collected inclusion criteria (the criteria that make a PSR eligible to be included in an SRR) and recorded them in the file systematic_review_inclusion_criteria.csv. We provide a file (potential_inclusion_link.csv) recording whether a given PSR had been published as of the search date of a given SRR, which makes the PSR potentially eligible for inclusion in the SRR. We also provide a bibliography of the 82 publications (supplementary_reference_list.pdf). Lastly, we discovered minor discrepancies between the inclusion relationships identified by Trinquart et al. (2016) and by us. Therefore, we prepared an additional edge list (inclusion_net_edges_trinquart.csv) to preserve the inclusion relationships identified by Trinquart et al. (2016). <b>UPDATES IN THIS VERSION COMPARED TO V2</b> (Fu, Yuanxi; Hsiao, Tzu-Kun; Joshi, Manasi Ballal (2022): The Salt Controversy Systematic Review Reports and Primary Study Reports Network Dataset. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. https://doi.org/10.13012/B2IDB-6128763_V2) - We added a new column "pub_date" to report_list.csv - We corrected mistakes in supplementary_reference_list.pdf for report #28 and report #80. The author of report #28 is not Salisbury D but Khaw, K.-T., & Barrett-Connor, E. Report #80 was mistakenly mixed up with report #81.

The relationship between physical activity and mental health, especially depression, is one of the most studied topics in the field of exercise science and kinesiology. Although there is strong consensus that regular physical activity improves mental health and reduces depressive symptoms, some debate the mechanisms involved in this relationship as well as the limitations and definitions used in such studies. Meta-analyses and systematic reviews continue to examine the strength of the association between physical activity and depressive symptoms for the purpose of improving exercise prescription as treatment or combined treatment for depression. This dataset covers 27 review articles (either systematic review, meta-analysis, or both) and 365 primary study articles addressing the relationship between physical activity and depressive symptoms. Primary study articles are manually extracted from the review articles. We used a custom-made workflow (Fu, Yuanxi. (2022). Scopus author info tool (1.0.1) [Python]. <a href="https://github.com/infoqualitylab/Scopus_author_info_collection">https://github.com/infoqualitylab/Scopus_author_info_collection</a> that uses the Scopus API and manual work to extract and disambiguate authorship information for the 392 reports. The author information file (author_list.csv) is the product of this workflow and can be used to compute the co-author network of the 392 articles. This dataset can be used to construct the inclusion network and the co-author network of the 27 review articles and 365 primary study articles. A primary study article is "included" in a review article if it is considered in the review article's evidence synthesis. Each included primary study article is cited in the review article, but not all references cited in a review article are included in the evidence synthesis or primary study articles. The inclusion network is a bipartite network with two types of nodes: one type represents review articles, and the other represents primary study articles. In an inclusion network, if a review article includes a primary study article, there is a directed edge from the review article node to the primary study article node. The attribute file (article_list.csv) includes attributes of the 392 articles, and the edge list file (inclusion_net_edges.csv) contains the edge list of the inclusion network. Collectively, this dataset reflects the evidence production and use patterns within the exercise science and kinesiology scientific community, investigating the relationship between physical activity and depressive symptoms. FILE FORMATS 1. article_list.csv - Unicode CSV 2. author_list.csv - Unicode CSV 3. Chinese_author_name_reference.csv - Unicode CSV 4. inclusion_net_edges.csv - Unicode CSV 5. review_article_details.csv - Unicode CSV 6. supplementary_reference_list.pdf - PDF 7. README.txt - text file 8. systematic_review_inclusion_criteria.csv - Unicode CSV <b>UPDATES IN THIS VERSION COMPARED TO V3</b> (Clarke, Caitlin; Lischwe Mueller, Natalie; Joshi, Manasi Ballal; Fu, Yuanxi; Schneider, Jodi (2023): The Inclusion Network of 27 Review Articles Published between 2013-2018 Investigating the Relationship Between Physical Activity and Depressive Symptoms. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. https://doi.org/10.13012/B2IDB-4614455_V3) - We added a new file systematic_review_inclusion_criteria.csv.

This dataset consists of the 286 publications retrieved from Web of Science and Scopus on July 6, 2023 as citations for Willoughby et al., 2014: Patrick H. Willoughby, Matthew J. Jansma, and Thomas R. Hoye (2014). A guide to small-molecule structure assignment through computation of (¹H and ¹³C) NMR chemical shifts. Nature Protocols, 9(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2014.042 We added the DOIs of the citing publications into a Zotero collection. Then we exported all 286 DOIs in two formats: a .csv file (data export) and an .rtf file (bibliography). <b>Willoughby2014_286citing_publications.csv</b> is a Zotero data export of the citing publications. <b>Willoughby2014_286citing_publications.rtf</b> is a bibliography of the citing publications, using a variation of the American Psychological Association style (7th edition) with full names instead of initials. To create <b>Willoughby2014_citation_contexts.csv</b>, HZ manually extracted the paragraphs that contain a citation marker of Willoughby et al., 2014. We refer to these paragraphs as the citation contexts of Willoughby et al., 2014. Manual extraction started with 286 citing publications but excluded 2 publications that are not in English, those with DOIs 10.13220/j.cnki.jipr.2015.06.004 and 10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.20200604.201 The silver standard aimed to triage the citing publications of Willoughby et al., 2014 that are at risk of propagating unreliability due to a code glitch in a computational chemistry protocol introduced in Willoughby et al., 2014. The silver standard was created stepwise: First one chemistry expert (YF) manually annotated the corpus of 284 citing publications in English, using their full text and citation contexts. She manually categorized publications as either at risk of propagating unreliability or not at risk of propagating unreliability, with a rationale justifying each category. Then we selected a representative sample of citation contexts to be double annotated. To do this, MJS turned the full dataset of citation contexts (Willoughby2014_citation_contexts.csv) into word embeddings, clustered them using similarity measures using BERTopic's HDBS, and selected representative citation contexts based on the centroids of the clusters. Next the second chemistry expert (EV) annotated the 77 publications associated with the citation contexts, considering the full text as well as the citation contexts. <b>double_annotated_subset_77_before_reconciliation.csv</b> provides EV and YF's annotation before reconciliation. To create the silver standard YF, EV, and JS discussed differences and reconciled most differences. YF and EV had principled reasons for disagreeing on 9 publications; to handle these, YF updated the annotations, to create the silver standard we use for evaluation in the remainder of our JCDL 2024 paper (<b>silver_standard.csv</b>) <b>Inter_Annotator_Agreement.xlsx</b> indicates publications where the two annotators made opposite decisions and calculates the inter-annotator agreement before and after reconciliation together. <b>double_annotated_subset_77_before_reconciliation.csv</b> provides EV and YF's annotation after reconciliation, including applying the reconciliation policy.