Quality Assurance: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
ADA expects a data deposit to meet quality requirements specified in the ADA deposit guidelines [5]. All deposits are assessed for quality assurance by an ADA archivist. This assessment includes both content and form. On the content side, the archivist will examine the data for presence of direct and indirect identifiers. On the form side, the archivist will confirm unambiguous, clear labels for all variables and run spell checks and basic metadata consistency and completeness checks. The archivist will then propose any corresponding changes to the depositor in a formal Processing Report. If the depositor does not agree to changes the ADA archivist deems necessary, a deposit may be rejected, outlined under Deposit & Appraisal [22]. If approved by the depositor, the archivist will implement the agreed changes and generate publication-ready versions of the data. All deposits are subject to data-level curation outlined under Background Information and Context, part 5 [24]. | |||
Accompanying documentation should be submitted to ensure comprehension of the study and the data. The archivist will liaise with the depositor to ensure that all necessary value labels and codes are defined, and that the DDI-Codebook 2.5 metadata fields are completed in Dataverse as specified in the Metadata Guidelines for ADA Dataverse [93], including reference to the DDI Controlled Vocabularies – Overview [104]. This ensures that the data are maximally findable and reusable. ADA typically requires Citation, Geospatial, and Social Sciences and Humanities metadata to be provided by depositors, as shown in an example of a published dataset [92] for reuse on the ADA Dataverse. It is not a requirement that a depositor completes all the DDI fields, but it is recommended to meet a minimum requirement for reuse as determined by the ADA based on the metadata guidelines [93]. ADA also encourages depositors to include references for related publications and other digital resources in their project metadata on Dataverse. | |||
The | |||
= | = References = | ||
[5] Deposit guidelines – (https://docs.ada.edu.au/index.php/Quick_Deposit_Guide) | |||
[22] Deposit Appraisal & Collection Policy - (https://docs.ada.edu.au/index.php/Deposit_Appraisal_%26_Collection_Policy) | |||
[24] Background Information and Context - (https://docs.ada.edu.au/index.php/Background_Information_and_Context) | |||
[93] Metadata guidelines for ADA Dataverse - (https://docs.ada.edu.au/index.php/Metadata_guidelines_for_ADA_Dataverse) | |||
[104] DDI Controlled Vocabularies - Overview - (https://rdf-vocabulary.ddialliance.org/cv) | |||
[92] Metadata guidelines for ADA Dataverse - (https://docs.ada.edu.au/index.php/Metadata_guidelines_for_ADA_Dataverse) | |||
Latest revision as of 22:41, 3 December 2025
ADA expects a data deposit to meet quality requirements specified in the ADA deposit guidelines [5]. All deposits are assessed for quality assurance by an ADA archivist. This assessment includes both content and form. On the content side, the archivist will examine the data for presence of direct and indirect identifiers. On the form side, the archivist will confirm unambiguous, clear labels for all variables and run spell checks and basic metadata consistency and completeness checks. The archivist will then propose any corresponding changes to the depositor in a formal Processing Report. If the depositor does not agree to changes the ADA archivist deems necessary, a deposit may be rejected, outlined under Deposit & Appraisal [22]. If approved by the depositor, the archivist will implement the agreed changes and generate publication-ready versions of the data. All deposits are subject to data-level curation outlined under Background Information and Context, part 5 [24].
Accompanying documentation should be submitted to ensure comprehension of the study and the data. The archivist will liaise with the depositor to ensure that all necessary value labels and codes are defined, and that the DDI-Codebook 2.5 metadata fields are completed in Dataverse as specified in the Metadata Guidelines for ADA Dataverse [93], including reference to the DDI Controlled Vocabularies – Overview [104]. This ensures that the data are maximally findable and reusable. ADA typically requires Citation, Geospatial, and Social Sciences and Humanities metadata to be provided by depositors, as shown in an example of a published dataset [92] for reuse on the ADA Dataverse. It is not a requirement that a depositor completes all the DDI fields, but it is recommended to meet a minimum requirement for reuse as determined by the ADA based on the metadata guidelines [93]. ADA also encourages depositors to include references for related publications and other digital resources in their project metadata on Dataverse.
References
[5] Deposit guidelines – (https://docs.ada.edu.au/index.php/Quick_Deposit_Guide)
[22] Deposit Appraisal & Collection Policy - (https://docs.ada.edu.au/index.php/Deposit_Appraisal_%26_Collection_Policy)
[24] Background Information and Context - (https://docs.ada.edu.au/index.php/Background_Information_and_Context)
[93] Metadata guidelines for ADA Dataverse - (https://docs.ada.edu.au/index.php/Metadata_guidelines_for_ADA_Dataverse)
[104] DDI Controlled Vocabularies - Overview - (https://rdf-vocabulary.ddialliance.org/cv)
[92] Metadata guidelines for ADA Dataverse - (https://docs.ada.edu.au/index.php/Metadata_guidelines_for_ADA_Dataverse)