Popdevr Transparency And Data

Transparency & Data (popdevr-transparency-and-data)

PDR sits within Wiley's author and research-integrity framework: a data availability statement is expected, ORCID is encouraged/required for submitting authors, and authors are expected to make data and materials available where ethics and licensing permit. PDR hosts no repository of its own — you choose a FAIR repository and provide persistent identifiers. Build the materials as you go so revision and acceptance do not stall. Verify current wording on the Wiley author page and the data-policy page. 待核实.

When to trigger

• Building the reproducibility materials and the data availability statement
• A manuscript reached revision/acceptance and you must finalize the statement and deposit
• Data cannot be fully shared (privacy, confidentiality, DHS/census licensing, provider restrictions) and you need the exemption language
• Choosing a repository and persistent identifier; setting up ORCID

What PDR / Wiley expect (verify current policy on the author page)

1. Data availability statement. Include a statement describing whether and how the data underlying the results can be accessed. For public data, give the access method with a persistent identifier (DOI or accession number); for restricted data, state the access conditions.
2. FAIR repository + persistent identifiers. Because PDR hosts no repository, deposit data and materials in a FAIR-aligned repository (ICPSR/openICPSR, Harvard Dataverse, Zenodo, OSF) and cite it with a permanent link — not a personal website or generic cloud folder. Find one via FAIRsharing.org or re3data.org.
3. Reproducible, documented code. Provide code that regenerates the results, with software versions recorded and informative comments. For a quantitative population-and-development paper, treat this as expected, not optional.
4. Restricted data (common in this field). DHS, census microdata, and linked administrative records are frequently licensed or confidential — describe the conditions limiting access and how others may obtain the data, provide the extract specification and code rather than the raw microdata, and align with FAIR principles as far as possible.
5. ORCID and integrity. Provide ORCID for the submitting author; declare funding, conflicts, and ethics/consent where human subjects are involved.

Build-as-you-go checklist

• Data availability statement drafted (public / restricted / on request) with persistent IDs
• Data + materials deposited in a FAIR repository with a DOI/accession number
• One master script regenerates every table, figure, life table, decomposition, and projection
• README documents data provenance/vintage, construction of rates/exposure, and how to reproduce each exhibit
• Code commented and software/package versions recorded (renv.lock / requirements.txt / installs)
• Seeds set and reported for bootstrap and simulation
• Exhibit numbers in the manuscript match the deposited output exactly
• Restricted data: exemption note + access conditions + extract spec + synthetic data where feasible
• ORCID registered for the submitting author; funding/conflicts/ethics declared

Anti-patterns

• Treating the data statement as a last-minute formality at acceptance
• A personal URL or generic cloud link instead of a persistent identifier in a FAIR repository
• Posting licensed DHS/census microdata you are not permitted to redistribute (share the extract code instead)
• Undocumented, un-seeded, uncommented code that "works on my machine"
• Claiming data are restricted without describing the access conditions

What a reproducibility reviewer expects at PDR

PDR draws referees who re-derive a denominator or re-run a decomposition, and who care that licensed data were handled correctly. Calibrate the package against the data class you actually used.

Referee-pushback patterns and the PDR-specific fix

• "I cannot tell which WPP/HMD vintage or DHS round produced these numbers." -> Record the release label and download date in the README and a code comment; vintages and rounds revise the figures.
• "You posted DHS microdata — that violates the license." -> Remove raw microdata; ship the DHS extract request specification and the cleaning code, and cite DHS as the persistent access path.
• "Your bootstrap/projection intervals are not reproducible." -> Set and report a seed for every resampling and simulation step.
• "You say data are restricted but give no way to obtain them." -> Name the data enclave or application pathway and the access conditions; a bare "restricted" reads as evasion.

Output format

【Data statement】public / restricted / on request — drafted with persistent ID? [Y/N]
【Repository】FAIR repo + DOI/accession (not personal URL)? [Y/N]
【Licensed data handled】extract code, not raw microdata, for DHS/census? [Y/N/NA]
【Reproducible code】master script + comments + recorded versions + seeds? [Y/N]
【Exhibits match deposit?】[Y/N]
【ORCID + declarations】submitting-author ORCID + funding/conflicts/ethics? [Y/N]
【Next】popdevr-review-process

Supplementary resources

• ../../resources/external_tools.md — FAIR repositories and reproducibility tooling
• ../../resources/official-source-map.md — PDR / Wiley data-availability and integrity policy