Main challenges

Two intrinsic challenges that the lightweight methods needed to overcome were (1) that those publishing ELIXIR-supported work are typically working part-time on ELIXIR matters, and (2) the scale of ELIXIR’s “people infrastructure” (more than 700 specialists across Europe, showing a level of staff turnover). The latter itself represented a significant barrier to manual reporting of publications. As for the former, traditional bibliometrics/scientometrics approaches centred on researchers’ unique identification numbers (e.g., ORCID, ResearcherID/Publons), and/or institutional affiliations, were deemed inadequate for identifying research works (funded and/or) supported by ELIXIR, as these approaches would result in significant amounts of ‘false positives’, i.e. publications not supported by ELIXIR. To overcome these two challenges, the lightweight methods were designed to (1) detect, through text-mining within an Open research literature database ( EuropePMC, Rosonovski et al., 2024), publications (peer-reviewed and preprints) in which there were acknowledgments of the support and/or funding received from ELIXIR, (2) followed by manual curation for increased accuracy.

Sources of ELIXIR support

For the ELIXIR infrastructure as a whole (all Nodes), two main streams of funding and/or support were considered: (1) ELIXIR’s internally-funded projects, i.e. Commissioned Services comprising Implementation Studies, Staff Exchange, Knowledge Exchanges and Industry days, and Travel Grants, where funding eligibility is restricted to institutes part of the ELIXIR membership, and (2) grant funding from international funders such as the European Union (notably under the Research Infrastructures Work Programmes), in which several ELIXIR institutes are beneficiaries and the purpose of the grant is to develop and/or operate the ELIXIR infrastructure.

Searching for relevant publications using text-mining

EuropePMC’s Application Programming Interface (API) was used to search for relevant publications (technical documentation), as well as their citations in the Open literature (technical documentation), considering all years for which ELIXIR existed, even as a concept ( circa 2011), with a cut-off date of December 2023 (for the purpose of this article). Search configuration parameters ( Table 1), i.e. ‘search terms’ for short, comprised unique grant identification numbers and names, names and short codes of countries that are members of ELIXIR (e.g. ELIXIR Norway, ELIXIR NO), as well as “boiler-plate” text strings relating to ELIXIR support and/or funding including for ‘signature’ events (e.g. the ELIXIR-convened Biohackathon Europe) and technical workshops/meetings. For use in EuropePMC’s API, the search terms (query parameters) were first URL encoded using the online utility URL Encode/Decode, provided free, courtesy of Dan’s Tools: for example, the EU funded project ELIXIR-CONVERGE would be encoded as “ELIXIR%2DCONVERGE”. Of note, EuropePMC is case insensitive, meaning that it is not necessary to provide search terms in both lower/upper cases. For the lightweight methods, acknowledgement of the use of the infrastructure and its resources was deemed beyond scope due to the mismatch between curation capacity at the ELIXIR Hub and the several hundreds of resources operated under the ELIXIR umbrella.

An initial set of search terms were entered in a Google Sheet, and retrieved from there via a specific Google Sheets API. This allowed for the subsequent dynamic configuration of the search queries when new grants were awarded to ELIXIR. The Google Sheet interacted with the EuropePMC API based on the retrieved search configuration, and the text-mining process resulted in the generation of tab-delimited text files listing potentially relevant publications comprising a mix of ELIXIR-related works (‘true positives’) and false positives. A complete list of API examples for the data retrieval in EuropePMC is illustrated in Table 2.

Manual curation and search optimisation

Manual identification of false positives was carried out using the tab-delimited text files, one column of which collated the triggers relevant to each returned publication. Triggers represented the search terms that had been detected in the publications and were found to guide curation very effectively. False positives were blacklisted for future searches. To ensure consistency, reproducibility and the lowest subjectivity possible in curation decisions, curation efforts were carried out by a small team of two ELIXIR Hub staff who kept a record of difficult and/or unclear cases, and of the decisions taken. They were supported on an ad-hoc basis by additional ELIXIR Hub staff who had more extensive knowledge and understanding of ELIXIR’s activities in certain thematic and technical areas.

During the initial development of the methods, iterative searches and manual curation rounds were undertaken to test and refine the set of search terms, and to identify which sections of EuropePMC entries (for each publication) were the most informative to target by text-mining - these were found to be the title, first author, funding statement, and acknowledgments. The initial text-mining runs naturally returned large backlogs of potentially relevant publications since they covered the years 2011 to 2019: although this made the curation effort significant at the time, it also provided a rich list of results to optimise the searches, notably to identify which sections ( Table 3) of the publications ought to be extracted to the tab-delimited text files used during manual curation and any downstream visualisations.

A set of known ELIXIR-supported publications was useful for fine-tuning the approach, as they would be expected to be returned by the searches. If this was not the case, underlying reasons would be investigated and, where possible, solutions found - if no solution was found, these publications were added (via their unique EuropePMC identification number) to a whitelist that would be pulled to the tab-delimited text file, regardless. Later on, once the methods were operational ( circa early 2020), the text-mining “harvests” (i.e. searches) followed by curation ended up being carried out on a monthly basis, to identify recently published and/or recently indexed publications, based on the latest set of search terms.

Search terms returning very high numbers of false positives for very few true positives were gradually excluded from searches. This was for instance the case of “ELIXIR” as a standalone term (misunderstood for the word “elixir”), “implementation study” (rather than the more precise “ELIXIR implementation study”), and the project name “BY-COVID” (incorrectly read as the very common text string “[infected] by COVID-19”). This was to strike a balance between accuracy (i.e. not missing any relevant publication) and overwhelming curators. Rather, it was deemed more useful to arrive at manageable monthly text-mining harvests and curation workloads moving forwards (approximately 3 to 4 hours per monthly harvest), since the intention was to arrive at operational performance metrics that could be monitored in the long-term, rather than a very accurate one-off exercise.

Unless otherwise specified, the methods for the Italian case study are identical to the lightweight one described above (for ELIXIR as a whole).

Sources of ELIXIR Italy support

Building on the experience of the ELIXIR Hub effort, the Italian case study began at the end of 2022 and was focused on the period January 2015 (the year when Italy became an ELIXIR member country) to December 2023 (cut-off date for the purpose of this article). The main three sources of funding and/or support considered in the Italian case study were (1) those ELIXIR internally funded projects in which one or more of the institutes of the Italian Node were involved, (2) ditto for grant funding from international funders, and (3) national-level grants awarded to the Node to develop and/or operate its infrastructure and resources.

Searching for relevant publications using text-mining

For the Italian case study, the ‘ELIXIR as a whole’ set of search terms was refined to remove terms not relevant to the Node, e.g. if the Italian Node was not a beneficiary of a given grant. Additional search terms were introduced (e.g. national-level grants) along with other terms (e.g. Italian Node of ELIXIR, often used instead of ELIXIR-IT or ELIXIR IIB) that were known to be mentioned in publications acknowledging support and/or funding by ELIXIR Italy ( Table 4).

The major expansion of the methods followed Drysdale et al. (2020) and their focus on citations of ‘key articles’ describing the Node’s resources. This additional search effort was approached by using the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of these ‘key articles’ to collate citation data and use this as proxy for the scientific impact of the Node’s resources. For example, the resource PatSearch was first described in Pesole et al. (2000) and an improved version of it was described in Grillo et al. (2003) - these are considered the resource’s ‘key articles’. The list of ELIXIR Italy resources was based on the 2023 version of the Node’s Service Delivery Plan under the ELIXIR umbrella, and the DOIs were sourced from the bio.tools registry ( Ison et al., 2019). For the 65 resources developed and operated by ELIXIR Italy in 2023, a total of 124 DOIs were hence collated, representing the ‘key articles’ describing initial and improved versions of these resources.

Manual curation and search optimisation

Curation in the context of the case study was a very similar process to that described above but carried out by ELIXIR Italy staff with knowledge of the Node’s activities. Author affiliations were additionally scrutinised and encoded to obtain a more granular view of dissemination efforts and scientific impact at the level of the Node’s institutes (30 in total at the time of writing). Sources of false positives were like that described above, e.g. project names such as “ORCHESTRA” (understood as the word “orchestra” or other projects called as such). As above, a balance was struck between accuracy and curation capacity by excluding problematic search terms (those returning high levels of false positives).

For the period 2011 to 2023, 972 publications supported by ELIXIR (as a whole) were identified, and these were collectively cited over 31,000 times ( Figure 1). The curated inventory of publications and their citations in the Open literature were used to create visualisations in Tableau software, which were themselves featured on ELIXIR’s impact dashboard, among other indicators relating to ELIXIR. On this dashboard, the page showing ELIXIR’s scientific legacy as a research infrastructure received nearly 600 unique visitors from over 40 countries in just 12 months (December 2022 to November 2023).

For the period 2015 to 2023, 408 publications supported by ELIXIR Italy were identified, which were collectively cited almost 5,000 times ( Figure 2). The distribution of publications across Node institutes ( Figure 3) is double-counted due to papers co-authored by multiple institutes; furthermore it highlights the disproportionate contribution of the National Research Council (NRC), though unsurprising given its role as the coordinating institute of ELIXIR Italy. Associated visualisations can be accessed on ELIXIR Italy’s impact dashboard which, for a 24 month period (January 2022 to December 2023), received over 5,000 unique visitors from 10 countries. In terms of the impact of resources developed and operated by ELIXIR Italy ( Table 5), citations of their ‘key articles’ amounted to 8,700, across the five ELIXIR Platforms, which are the technical domains of implementation of the infrastructure.

One main limitation of the methods is linked to EuropePMC being used as the central source of publication data - only the publications indexed in this literature database, focused on life sciences, can be returned by the searches. At the time of writing, specialised journals such as Data Science Journal and Data Intelligence were not yet indexed due to perceived low demand of these in the user base of EuropePMC. However, based on user feedback, EuropePMC started indexing BioHackrXiv in 2021, especially as it is the recommended preprint server for outcomes of the ELIXIR-convened Biohackathon Europe series ( Castro et al., 2021).

Although research funders are increasingly requesting that the work they fund is openly accessible, it was found that certain ELIXIR-relevant publications were behind paywalls. This meant that EuropePMC was not able to fully “ingest” the text of certain sections of the source text, e.g. funding statement, which made text-mining efforts fail, despite the publication having a presence in EuropePMC and the right trigger being present. This was manually solved on an ad-hoc basis by whitelisting these publications using their unique EuropePMC identification number. ( Table 6 lists such whitelisted publications examples) Additionally, this method can effectively identify ELIXIR-related publications that are non-compliant with open access policies and funder requirements.

Looking forward, EuropePMC continues to work closely with scientific publishers to agree and implement standards so that ingestion of information from the publishers’ sites to EuropePMC is more effective. This is an on-going and quite a considerable task, and additional sources of text-mining failures included conflicts in metadata, embargoed works in paywalled journals, as well as citations being limited to the Open literature, the latter leading to underestimated scientific impact.

The intention behind this work was to arrive at operational performance metrics that could be easily monitored in the long-term, in contrast to a rigorous and hence heavy-duty process requiring significant resources, likely to be carried out once or twice at best. The curated inventories of publications, including their citations, have so far been used as input into ELIXIR’s annual reports, ELIXIR newsletters and social media posts (under the heading “Recommended reading”), technical reporting to funders, as well as ELIXIR’s monitoring report to ESFRI and a growing number of requests for information from national funders, such as Sweden ( Swedish Research Council, 2021), Finland ( Academy of Finland, 2023) and the Netherlands ( NWO, 2023).

Similar to ELIXIR, ELIXIR Italy has used the curated inventories of publications and their citations for a range of internal and external monitoring activities, as required by various stakeholders, for example periodic Node reviews and presentations for ELIXIR’s Board of funders, Scientific Advisory Board and Industry Advisory Committee. The information has also been used to report to ELIXIR Italy’s own Scientific Advisory Board, as well as for the Node’s general assembly and monthly newsletters. Finally, the information has been used to report to ELIXIR’s Italy’s main funder, the Italian Ministry for Universities and Research (MUR)), notably as part of evaluation processes and of national-level grant funding for research infrastructures.

Ethical approval and consent were not required.