Skip to content

VHP4Safety/guidance-romp

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

24 Commits
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

Research Output Management - VHP4Safety

Last updated: 2026-03-16


Table of Contents


Background

Immediate Goals / Aims of this Introduction

Help you organise your research data (+ context) in a way it can be reused and shared.

Why?

  • Reuse and integration of datasets across the project
  • Scientific integrity/transparency: access to data underlying research results

Diagram shows that reproducible science doesn't cost you more time, but you have to spend the time at different points during publication. Using reproducible practices you can save a lot of time during the revision of your paper. Time that is well spent upfront to make your reporting reproducible.
Figure 1: Reproducible science workflow highlighting that reproducible science does not require more time, but more time upfront.

Intermediate Goal

Get your dataset or model listed on the VHP4Safety platform. This will allow you to share your data with the project and the wider scientific community, and to reference your data in your publications. We index this data on BioStudies or Zenodo and friends so the archive's longevity is secured and we can provide you with persistent direct object identifier (doi).

Ultimate Goal: Open Science for Regulatory‑Ready Toxicology

The ultimate goal is to enable open, transparent, and reusable toxicological science that directly supports regulatory decision‑making. By making datasets, models, and their full scientific context FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable), we aim to close the gap between academic research, collaborative projects, and regulatory application. Open and well‑documented toxicology data:

  • Enables independent verification and reproducibility of scientific findings
  • Facilitates cross‑study integration and model reuse, reducing duplication of effort
  • Supports the development, validation, and regulatory acceptance of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs)
  • Increases trust, traceability, and transparency in safety assessments

By publishing datasets and models on platforms such as VHP4Safety, research outputs become citable, discoverable, and usable beyond their original context—ultimately accelerating the transition toward animal‑free, data‑driven, and regulator‑ready toxicology that benefits science, industry, and public health alike.

Repositories

Different repositories are suited to different types of research output. Choosing the appropriate repository helps ensure that data and models are findable, reusable, and interpreted in the correct context. Zenodo: BioStudies – Structured repository for experimental life‑science data, well suited for in vitro and toxicology studies; curated models may fit better in BioModels.

  • BioStudies: Structured repository for experimental life‑science data, well suited for in vitro and toxicology studies. Curated models may fit better in BioModels.
  • Zenodo: General‑purpose repository for datasets, software, scripts, reports, and mixed outputs.
  • FAIRDOMHub: Supports systems biology and modelling workflows, linking models, data, and protocols.
  • etc.

Rooted in Good Scientific/Laboratory Practice

The principles underlying this approach are decades old and deeply embedded in academic and laboratory research practice. Since at least the 1970s, frameworks such as Good Scientific Practice (GSP) at universities and Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) in medical and toxicological research have required researchers to systematically record, retain, and document raw data, methods, protocols, and contextual information to ensure traceability, integrity, and reproducibility. GLP was formalized by regulatory bodies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the OECD precisely to address problems arising from incomplete records and irreproducible safety studies, and it explicitly mandates the archiving of all materials needed to reconstruct a study.12 University‑level GSP and research‑integrity guidelines similarly emphasize long‑term stewardship of data and documentation, even when reuse by others was not yet a goal.3 FAIR and open‑science practices therefore do not redefine what good research requires; rather, they build on these long‑standing foundations by making existing good practice more explicit, structured, and sustainable in a digital context.4 If this feels like a substantial change, it is not a criticism of past work but an opportunity to modernize workflows in ways that often reduce long‑term effort, support collaboration, and increase the impact and longevity of research outputs—particularly in medical and toxicological science. For a complete overview of of what is expected within the GSP/GLP vs FAIR framework, see Table A1 in the Appendix.

Table 1: Example of FAIR principle Findable in historical context of Good Scientific Practice (GSP).
Object Findable under GSP How
Paper / article ✅ Yes Journals, PubMed, Web of Science
Authors ✅ Yes Affiliations, ORCID
Main conclusions ✅ Yes Abstract, discussion
Experimental data ❌ No (usually) “Available upon request”
Code / models ❌ No Often not published
Parameters / versions ❌ No Buried in text or missing
Negative results ❌ No Rarely published

Holistic approach to research output

Research output includes not only (experimental) data files, but also computational models, protocols, lab notebooks, analysis scripts, metadata, and any other information needed to reuse, reproduce, or interpret your work, whether it originates from in vitro experiments or in silico modelling.5

Tip

We encourage you to share all relevant research output related to your dataset and/or model.


Steps

Step 1: List your dataset in the research output inventory

Use the Research Output Inventory link to announce your dataset exists.

  • Decide at what level you want to make the data repository entry
    • As a general recommendation, it is easiest to align your datasets with the scope of your papers. A paper may consist of multiple assays that produce data — in this scenario, the data of all assays would be packaged together in one dataset.
  • Define a clear and descriptive title
    • This will be the title for your BioStudies entry (or other repository) and will be displayed on platform.vhp4safety.nl
  • Fill out the other fields as much as possible, including the expected public release date (if applicable) and the contact person for this dataset

Column explanations of Research Output Inventory

Table 2: Column explanations of Research Output Inventory
Column Description Expected value
title Title of the dataset; becomes the repository entry title and is displayed on platform.vhp4safety.nl Free text — clear and descriptive
identifier Assigned Public URL or persistent identifier (DOI, BioStudies accession) once deposited URL / DOI
privateLink Internal link to the dataset before public release (e.g. BioStudies private key URL) URL
caseStudy VHP4Safety case study this dataset relates to kidney / thyroid / parkinson / other (multiple allowed)
regulatoryQuestion Regulatory question addressed by this dataset Q1 / Q2 (multiple allowed)
workPackage Work Package within the VHP4Safety project e.g. WP1.1, WP2.1, WP3.1
workflowStep Step in the VHP4Safety workflow — see glossary.vhp4safety.nl External exposure / Internal exposure / Toxico(kinetics) / Toxicodynamics/AOP / Hazard / Adverse Outcome (multiple allowed)
status Current sharing status See Status table below
embargoDate Date until which the entry remains private YYYY-MM-DD
license Data license applied to the dataset e.g. CC0, CC BY 4.0
hasMetadata Whether a metadata template has been filled out No / Yes
hasToxTemp Whether a ToxTemp template has been completed (cell-based assays only) No / Started / Yes
hasROCrate Assigned when an RO-Crate package has been created No / Yes
contactPerson Name of the person responsible for this dataset Firstname Lastname
partnerCode Partner organisation code of the contact person e.g. RIVM, UU, UM
type Type of research output See Type table below, an entry is always a dataset, multiple types can be combined
isReviewed Whether the entry has been peer-reviewed No / Ongoing / Yes
Notes Any additional remarks or context Free text

Status

Table 3: Options for status column.
Status Description
🔴 Not shared The dataset/model exists only on your local computer and has not been uploaded anywhere.
🟠 Partially shared Some files have been uploaded and shared with the project, but the dataset/model is not yet complete.
🟡 Shared Uploaded to the VHP Teams shared folder and visible to project members.
🔵 Private Deposited in a repository (e.g. BioStudies) but not yet publicly visible; the embargo date has not passed.
🟢 Public Publicly available in a repository and accessible to anyone.

Type

Table 4: Possible Types in Type Column
Type Description Schema mapping
Dataset A collection of raw, processed, or derived data files describing one or more topics of interest schema:Dataset
Study A structured grouping of related assays or experiments sharing a common subject or research question
BioAssay A specific biological test or measurement procedure producing qualitative or quantitative data
BioModel A computational or mathematical model representing a biological system or process bioschemas:ComputationalWorkflow / schema:SoftwareSourceCode
BioSample A biological sample, cell line, or barrier model used in the study bioschemas:BioSample
SoftwareApplication A software tool, pipeline, or application used to generate or analyse data schema:SoftwareApplication / schema:SoftwareSourceCode
ScholarlyArticle A peer-reviewed publication associated with the dataset or model schema:ScholarlyArticle
AdverseOutcomePathway An AOP entry describing a sequence of causally linked biological events (e.g. from AOP-Wiki)

An entry is always tagged as Dataset, but can be associated with one or more additional types for context. For example, a dataset describing an assay would be tagged as Dataset + BioAssay, while a computational model would be tagged as Dataset + BioModel.


Step 2: Organise your folder(s) in a logical way

After finishing step one by announcing your dataset, in this step we help you organizing your dataset. A dataset = one main folder consisting of files (and possibly subfolders with additional files).

What should be in this folder?

Files, including but not limited to:

  • Protocols
  • Lab Notebooks
  • Slides
  • Raw data
  • Processed data
  • Analysis scripts
  • Metadata
  • Manuscript
  • And other pieces of information needed to reuse, reproduce or interpret the data

Important

Provide every folder (main and eventual subfolders) with a README.txt to briefly explain in plain language what the folder is about and how the files/subfolders relate to each other.

ISA folder structure

  • We recommend organising your folder according to an ISA (Investigation, Study, Assay) structure:
    • Investigation — high-level concept to link related studies
    • Study — the central unit, containing information on the subject under study, its characteristics and any treatments applied (a study has associated assays)
    • Assay — test performed either on material taken from the subject or on the whole initial subject, which produce qualitative or quantitative measurements (data)

Example: Investigation = WP2.4, Study = TH-DNT-NeuronalCellLines, Assay = THuptake

Folder structure examples

Structure Example:

your-investigation/                            ← investigation root
├── investigation_metadata.xlsx
├── README.txt
│
└── studies/
    └── your-study-name/                       ← study level
        ├── study_metadata.xlsx
        ├── README.txt
        ├── resources/                         ← starting materials, external data
        ├── protocols/                         ← study-level protocols
        │
        └── assays/                            ← assays nested inside their study
            ├── your-assay-name/
            │   ├── assay_metadata.xlsx
            │   ├── README.txt
            │   ├── protocols/
            │   └── dataset/
            └── your-second-assay-name/
                ├── assay_metadata.xlsx
                ├── README.txt
                ├── protocols/
                └── dataset/                               ← outputs of computational analyses (optional)

Example:

TH-DNT-NeuronalCellLines/                     ← investigation root
├── investigation_metadata.xlsx
├── README.txt
│
└── studies/
    └── TH-DNT-NeuronalCellLines/             ← study level
        ├── study_metadata.xlsx
        ├── README.txt
        ├── resources/
        ├── protocols/
        │   ├── 20251114_cell_culture_protocol_H4.docx
        │   └── 20251114_cell_culture_protocol_MO3.13.docx
        │
        └── assays/                            ← assays live inside the study
            ├── deiodinase/
            │   ├── assay_metadata.xlsx
            │   ├── README.md
            │   ├── protocols/
            │   │   ├── 3.3_Bradford_protocol.xlsx
            │   │   └── 4.1_Deiodinase_activity_assay.docx
            │   └── dataset/
            │       ├── characterisation/
            │       │   ├── 20221019_H4_MO_SK_D2_D3/
            │       │   │   ├── Deiodinase_activity_assay_19-10-22.xlsx
            │       │   │   └── raw_data/
            │       │   ├── 20230301_H4_MO_SK_D2_D3/
            │       │   │   ├── Deiodinase_activity_assay_SK_MO_H4_01-03-2023.xlsx
            │       │   │   └── raw_data/
            │       │   ├── 20230503_SK_D2_D3/
            │       │   ├── 20230510_H4_MO_D2_D3/
            │       │   └── Combined_deiodinase_data_EDCs.xlsx
            │       └── EDCs/
            ├── metabolism/
            │   ├── assay_metadata.xlsx
            │   ├── README.txt
            │   ├── protocols/
            │   └── dataset/
            ├── TH_uptake/
            │   ├── assay_metadata.xlsx
            │   ├── README.txt
            │   ├── protocols/
            │   └── dataset/
            └── TR_activation/
                ├── assay_metadata.xlsx
                ├── README.txt
                ├── protocols/
                └── dataset/

Conventions

Important

File and Folder Name Conventions:

  • If you need separators, use thyroid_case or thyroid-case — use them consistently
  • No spaces and avoid special characters (see incompatible characters)
  • Keep names short but specific

README files:


Step 3: Fill out the minimal metadata template

If you do not have a metadata template yet, use the MinimalMetadataTemplate-v1.2 to describe your assay(s).

This metadata template consists of the following modules (tabs), considered relevant for toxicology research:

  1. General Information
  2. Biological Model Information
  3. Chemical Information
  4. Exposure Information
  5. Endpoint Readout Information
  6. Analysis and Statistics

Each module has fields that may be relevant to you. You can ignore fields that are not relevant or add fields to your liking. By working with these modules you should be able to inherit modules for your different assays, avoiding duplication of effort.

Important

Save as yourassayname_assay_metadata.xlsx in the assay folder.


Step 4: Fill out the ToxTemp template (if applicable)

ToxTemp Assistant: https://toxtempassistant.vhp4safety.nl/

  • This is for cell-based toxicological methods (assays)
  • We do not expect you to be able to fill this template in one go
  • You can provide files from your study and assay folder as context for the ToxTemp — the ToxTempAssistant will output a prefilled ToxTemp for you to review

Important

Add the ToxTemp to your folder at the level of the assay.


Step 5: Share your final dataset(s)

  1. Upload to VHP Teams link to folder, set to status to 'shared' in the inventory link.
  2. Your dataset will be packaged into a Research Object (RO)-Crate and uploaded to BioStudies (or another repository).
  3. Your entry will remain private until the public release date, you will be able to update the dataset before and the public release date.
  4. Reference your data in the data availability statement of your paper through a persistent identifier (e.g. DOI, BioStudies accession number) once the dataset is public.

Appendix

Table A1. Overview of Good Laboratory/Science Practice (GLP/GSP) vs FAIR.
Aspect Description of what it entails GLP / GSP FAIR Change comment
Scope of research output Data, protocols, notebooks, scripts, models, metadata No change in scope; FAIR makes this scope explicit and visible
Data retention Preserve original data and records over time FAIR relies on repositories to ensure durability
Documentation Describe methods, parameters, assumptions FAIR requires documentation to support external users
Reproducibility Enable study reconstruction if needed FAIR promotes reproducibility by default, not on request
Provenance & traceability Track origin, versions, changes FAIR makes provenance machine‑readable
Effort profile When effort is invested ✅ (late) ✅ (early) FAIR shifts effort upfront to reduce long‑term cost
Standard formats & vocabularies Use consistent structures and terminology FAIR formalizes and standardizes this
Accessibility Clear conditions for accessing data FAIR requires explicit access rules, even if restricted
Findability Ability to discover data/models FAIR introduces persistent identifiers and indexing
Reuse by others Enable use beyond the original project New expectation under FAIR
Machine readability Structured for computational use New requirement driven by FAIR
Citation & credit Enable formal citation of outputs FAIR introduces DOIs and formal credit mechanisms

Legend: ✅ expected, ◐ partially expected / implicit, ❌ not expected

References

Footnotes

  1. OECD. Principles of Good Laboratory Practice (1997, revised).
    https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/sites/default/files/iccvam/suppdocs/feddocs/oecd/oecd_glpcm.pdf

  2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 21 CFR Part 58 – Good Laboratory Practice for Nonclinical Laboratory Studies.
    https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/good-laboratory-practice-nonclinical-laboratory-studies

  3. Harvard University. Retention and Maintenance of Research Records and Data.
    https://research.harvard.edu/research-records-and-data-retention

  4. Nature Scientific Data. Guidelines for Research Data Integrity (2024).
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-024-04312-x

  5. Jente Houweling, Egon Willighagen. (2023). Research Output Management. Qeios. https://doi.org/10.32388/ZNWI7T.

About

VHP4Safety Hackathon · 17–18 March 2026 · Instructions & materials.

Resources

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

 
 
 

Contributors