Funding

Status: Published 
Version: 1.2
License: this recommendation document is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0 UK
DOI
ISBN:

Provenance

Version 1.1 was updated as a result of feedback from Mike Eden. This was then reviewed by the JATS4R Steering Committee.


JATS4R sub-group. Members (listed in alphabetical order):

Jeff Beck, NCBI, Mark Doyle, American Physical Society, Patricia Feeney, Crossref, Melissa Harrison, eLife (Chair), Chuck Koscher Crossref, Kirsty Meddings Crossref, Evan Owens, Independent Consultant, Alexander Schwarzman, The Optical Society.

Change history

Validator rules on recommendation 7 have been updated.

Version 1.1 can be found here

Description

Crossref convened a working group to produce a recommendation for best practice of funding tagging, which resulted in some change requests to the JATS DTD. These have now been made, so JATS4R created a subgroup to create a JATS4R recommendation. 

Traditionally, funding information has been held within the acknowledgments section of an article in an unstructured format. As machine readability and re-use of this information have become more critical, publishers and funders require a way to structure this information for mining and re-use, and for this information to be sent to Crossref. It is recommended that publishers use the following recommendation to produce structured funding metadata. The focus of this recommendation is to ensure that a strict tagging model for funding information within the metadata of the article (or a sub-article) is provided in the XML for machine-readable reuse, although this doesn’t preclude also using a looser, mixed content tagging model within descriptive text that might appear in, for example, an acknowledgment section of an article. 

There are many combinations of funders, awards, and people associated with a research item. For example, we encountered samples with:

  • One funder and multiple awards
  • Multiple funders and one award
  • One funder, multiple awards, and multiple people 
  • Multiple funders, one award, and multiple people 

Non-monetary support is outside the scope of this recommendation.

The recommendation allows content to be repeated in the metadata markup, but best supports the four use-cases we found and was considered to be a favourable solution to prevent ambiguity. 

This recommendation is for JATS 1.1 and later. We’ve not written it for JATS 1.0 because some elements and attributes have been added in 1.1 that support the information that needs to be collected. 

Context

<article-meta>, <front-stub>, <support-group>, <funding-group>, <award-group>, <funding-source>, <award-id>, <institution-wrap>, <institution>, <institution-id>, <principal-award-recipient>, @country, @institution-id-type, @vocab, @vocab-identifier, @id, <contrib-id>, @contrib-id-type

JATS 1.3 requested additions: new elements <award-name> and <award-description>. 

JATS 1.3 additions: new attribute @award-id-type attribute on <award-id> was added in the Committee Draft 1.3d1

Additional reading 

Recommendation

DTD versions: JATS 1.1 and 1.2

  1. <funding-group>. All funding data should be contained in a single <funding-group> located either in <article-meta> or inside <support-group> (introduced in JATS 1.2) within <article-meta>.

    Exception: Should the article contain a <sub-article> and the funding of this is distinct from and does not inherit that of the main article, an additional <funding-group> should be contained within either <front-stub> or <support-group> (introduced in JATS 1.2) within <front-stub>.

    [[Validator tool result: more than one <funding-group> found within <article-meta> ERROR]]

    [[Validator tool result: more than one <funding-group> found within a single <front-stub> ERROR]]
  2. Multiple <award-group>s are allowed within <funding-group>. Each <award-group> must contain one <funding-source>; <funding-source> can have zero or multiple  <award-id>s (if more than one, must be from the same funder).

    [[Validator tool result: more than one <funding-source> found within <award-group> ERROR]]

    [[Validator tool result: no <funding-source> or <support-source> found within <award-group> ERROR]]
  3. <award-id>. If an award is a joint award from multiple funders, each using the same <award-id>, then each funder should appear in its own <award-group> and the <award-id> should be repeated in each.
  4. When available, <award-id> should be used to record the grant or award provided by the funder. 
  5. @award-id-type. Crossref has introduced Grant Identifiers (DOIs assigned to individual grants by participating funders) and an application to the JATS Standing Committee has been submitted and accepted to add an @award-id-type attribute to the content model for <award-id>. This attribute has been included in the Committee Draft 1.3d1, but it is not yet in the official standard. The final tagging will be:
    <award-id award-id-type=“doi”>10.13039/501100001824</award-id>

    [[Validator tool result: value of @award-id-type=“doi” starts with something other than”10.” ERROR]]
  6. <funding-source> should only contain one <institution-wrap>. <institution-wrap> is a wrapper element to hold both the name of an institution (<institution>) and any identifiers for that institution (<institution-id>). 

    If your content contains a compound funder name and every part has its own open funder registry DOI, it is recommended that you tag the most specific funding source within <institution> and apply the funding registry ID (see below). One can always traverse the registry starting from a specific child to find any ancestors, but not vice versa. 

    [[Validator tool result: more than one <institution-wrap> within <funding-source> ERROR]]
  7. <institution>. If the funder is not listed in any funding registry (or you do not know what it is) please include the name of the funder in <institution>, but if the funder registry details are included, please use the following tagging:
    • JATS 1.2 Use the vocab attributes on <institution-id> to identify a funding registry. For example, if you are using the Open Funder Registry and the <funding-source> is an institution contained within the registry an <institution-id> is required, with the following attributes:

      i) @institution-id-type=”doi” 
      ii) @vocab=”open-funder-registry” 
      iii) @vocab-identifier=”10.13039/open_funder_registry”

      [[Validator tool result: if JATS 1.2 or later If @vocab=”open-funder-registry” present then @vocab-identifier=”10.13039/open_funder_registry” and @institution-id-type=”doi” must be present ERROR]]

      [[Validator tool result: if JATS 1.2 or later if @vocab=”open-funder-registry” or @vocab-identifier=”10.13039/open_funder_registry” then value of the element must start with “10.13039/” ERROR]]
    • JATS 1.1 @vocab attributes are not available, so if you are using the Open Funder Registry and the <funding-source> is an institution contained within the Open Funder registry, an <institution-id> is required, with the following attribute:

      i) @institution-id-type=”doi”

      [[Validator tool result: @institution-id-type=”doi” must contain value which starts with “10.” ERROR]]
  1. <institution-id>. If you are using the Open Funder Registry, the value provided in <institution-id> should be the DOI (e.g. 10.13039/100000002) but while the content of the institution-id tag contains the DOI of the specific funder, it is not expected that the Funder DOI will be displayed (and so it does not affect the Crossref DOI display guidelines).
  2. <institution>. If using a registry, the text within <institution> should contain one of the name labels available from the registry. For example, if using the Open Funder Registry, use the preferred or alternative label.

    [[Validator tool result: institution name n/a in registry]]
  3. An application to the JATS Standing Committee has been submitted to add new tags in JATS 1.3: <award-name> and <award-description> in <award-group> for tagged additional funding such as <award-description>Stanley Cohen Innovation Fund</award-description> or <award-name>Graduate Fellowship program</award-name>. In the meantime, we suggest this content remains outside of the <funding-group>. A looser, mixed content tagging model can be used within descriptive text that might appear in, for example, an acknowledgment section of an article.
  4. <principal-award-recipient>. If a publisher provides named people/institutions associated with funding, only 1 person or organisation per <principal-award-recipient> is allowed, but <principal-award-recipient> may repeat in an award group. 
  5. <contrib-id> within <principal-award-recipient> or <contrib>. Use this element to contain a person’s ORCID ID, or alternative identifier, if provided, with @contrib-id-type set to the ID-assigning authority; e.g., contrib-type=”orcid”. 

    Note: If the ORCID has been collected using a validation process, add @authenticated with a value of “true”. If it has not been, use @authenticated with a value of “false”.
  6. <funding-statement>. If a narrative funding statement exists, it should be included in <funding-statement>.

Examples

        JATS 1.2

Generic HighlightingEnlighterJS Syntax Highlighter

JATS 1.1

Generic HighlightingEnlighterJS Syntax Highlighter

JATS 1.2: Multiple awards from the same funder

Generic HighlightingEnlighterJS Syntax Highlighter

JATS 1.1: Multiple awards from the same funder

Generic HighlightingEnlighterJS Syntax Highlighter

JATS 1.2: Joint award from multiple funders

Generic HighlightingEnlighterJS Syntax Highlighter

JATS 1.1: Joint award from multiple funders

Generic HighlightingEnlighterJS Syntax Highlighter

History

Steering Committee review: September, 2021
Published: September 13, 2021

Updated on September 13, 2021

Related Articles

Provide feedback on this recommendation

Please note you are commenting on this specific recommendation. To suggest a new recommendation, please follow the link on the homepage. By proceeding with your comment here, you understand that your comment will be publicly visible and you may be contacted by JATS4R in case of further clarification.

You may use markdown to format your comment. For example, to allow <> tags to display, please start and end that portion of your comment with three backtick characters, ```.