search

openMetadataInitiative / openMINDS_core

The openMINDS core metadata model includes schemas that can be used to describe the general origin, location and content of research products.
MIT License
20 stars 19 forks source link

subject.schema.json: needs extension and research (?) #14

Open jcolomb opened 4 years ago

jcolomb commented 4 years ago

I had started to give some thought into what would be needed here: https://github.com/jcolomb/Description-of-Rodents-in-Scientific-Publications

I would love to know how you got to that list of properties you have (and why you miss the birthdate/age information) and if anyone is interested in working on this a bit more. Maybe we need a different schema for different species (or at least which information is necessary may differ). I would also prefer to have one file for each subject (age could be then be better define for instance).

I think this would deserve a publication and a user friendly way to include the information in publication (spreadsheet version), and I am looking for collaborators.

lzehl commented 4 years ago

Hi, this is a bit difficult for openMINDS which is supposed to be a generic schema for neuroscience data across modalities and species. For humans it is not allowed to capture a birth or death date. Also this information is not necessarily captured for animals (although it should). With this you need to separate age from the subject metadata block, because the age is measured at the time of the experiment and is different for the same subject at the next experiment (studies that take longer and measure the same subject at different points in time).

In principle you are correct, though. To capture detailed information on subjects one would need to create different schemas for different species or at least animal orders.

This is worth a discussion and we should maybe schedule a meeting (video call for this). I'm very open for a collaboration on this. Best, Lyuba

lzehl commented 3 years ago

@apdavison I think this could be interesting for in-depth extensions. What do you think?