| Literature DB >> 34882674 |
Jessica L Burnett1, Renee Dale2, Chung-Yi Hou3, Gabriela Palomo-Munoz4, Kaitlin Stack Whitney5, Steve Aulenbach1, Robert Sky Bristol1, Denis Valle6, Tristan P Wellman1.
Abstract
The use of scientific web applications (SWApps) across biological and environmental sciences has grown exponentially over the past decade or so. Although quantitative evidence for such increased use in practice is scant, collectively, we have observed that these tools become more commonplace in teaching, outreach, and in science coproduction (e.g., as decision support tools). Despite the increased popularity of SWApps, researchers often receive little or no training in creating such tools. Although rolling out SWApps can be a relatively simple and quick process using modern, popular platforms like R shiny apps or Tableau dashboards, making them useful, usable, and sustainable is not. These 10 simple rules for creating a SWApp provide a foundation upon which researchers with little to no experience in web application design and development can consider, plan, and carry out SWApp projects.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34882674 PMCID: PMC8659688 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009574
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Comput Biol ISSN: 1553-734X Impact factor: 4.475
Fig 1The number of publications (1991–2020) mentioning “web applications” (including Tableau, Shiny Apps, and WebGIS) across all PLOS publications (dashed line; PLOS) and in select publications in fields related to natural resources management (solid line; non-PLOS) has risen exponentially since approximately 2015.
Data gathered from Web of Science on July 26, 2021 using the following advanced search Boolean: `TS = ("web app*" OR "shiny app*" OR "tableau" OR "webgis") AND (SU = ("Biodiversity & Conservation" OR "Environmental Sciences & Ecology" OR "Fisheries" OR "Forestry") OR SO = PLOS*)`.
Fig 2Overview of the 10 simple rules for creating a SWApp among 3 stages we have identified: planning, development, and communication. SWApp, scientific web application.
Potential costs and benefits for researchers to consider when creating, participating in, or leading a SWApp project.
| Potential benefits (+) | Potential costs (−) | |
|---|---|---|
| Knowledge transfer | - Enhances or accelerates future web application projects | - Unforeseen problems requiring unbudgeted time and resources |
| - Delivering valuable products and services to a community | - Limited usage by the community minimizes impact of knowledge transfer | |
| - Web application can be misinterpreted or used in inappropriate ways | ||
| Monetary | - Can be used as a template for future SWApps | - Maintenance costs including personnel time, computing, and hosting may be prohibitive when poorly defined |
| - Web application reduces operational costs compared to other forms of disseminating information | - Limited value to taxpayers when usage is narrow, or service is not timely or relevant | |
| Time investment | - Learn new skills or technologies | - Limited organizational rewards or incentives |
| - Diversifies professional portfolio | - Opportunity cost (time spent creating app distracts from research) | |
| - Research may show broad impact if addressing topics that have an influence in other areas outside of the intended field (e.g., controversial topics and epidemiology) | - Research contribution might face unexpected scrutiny if web application has broad impact or addresses a controversial topic | |
| - Difficult to demonstrate impact |
SWApp, scientific web application.
A brief guide for identifying workflow models most appropriate for a SWApp project.
| Project characteristic | AGILE | Iterative | Prototyping | Spiral |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The project is a prototype or is not necessarily expected to end in a finished product | + | + | - | |
| Project is large, complex, and/or high risk | - | + | - | + |
| The project can be broken into small, distinct, and noninterdependent deliverables (e.g., software requires many functions, UI requires many smaller features) | + | + | ||
| Project or app has a long expected life span | - | - | + | |
| Major changes are expected in requirements, timelines, or expectations over the project period | + | + | + | + |
| Early versions need to be functional and are available to end users throughout development | + | + | ||
| End user feedback will be sought early and often | + | + | + | + |
| The underlying information or technologies are expected to change | + | - | + | |
| Documentation is lengthy and complex | - | + | - | |
| Software testing is important (app new, previously untested, or complicated software) | + | - |
Benefits and downsides to selecting a particular workflow model are indicated using the plus (+) and minus or hyphen (-) signs, respectively.
SWApp, scientific web application; UI, user interface.