ISO/IEC 23751:2022 Information technology

/ Information Technology Sector Certification, ISO/IEC 23751:2022 Information technology / By

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 is a standard that provides a framework for the management of metadata in information technology, particularly in software and systems engineering. Below is a comprehensive overview of this standard, including its purpose, requirements, and implications for organizations.

Overview of ISO/IEC 23751:2022

Purpose

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 aims to enhance the understanding and management of metadata within IT systems. It provides guidelines for the effective use of metadata throughout the lifecycle of software and systems, ensuring that metadata is accurate, consistent, and accessible.

Key Objectives

  1. Standardization of Metadata: Establish consistent definitions and formats for various metadata elements to facilitate interoperability between systems.

  2. Integration into Software Development: Encourage the integration of metadata management practices within the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC).

  3. Enhancement of Data Quality: Improve the quality and usability of data by providing context and facilitating easier data retrieval.

Key Requirements

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 outlines several critical requirements for organizations to follow:

  1. Metadata Framework Development: Organizations should create a comprehensive framework for metadata management that aligns with the principles outlined in the standard.

  2. Definition of Metadata Elements: Clear definitions of metadata elements should be established to promote uniformity and clarity across projects.

  3. Integration into SDLC: Metadata management practices should be incorporated at every phase of the software development process, from planning to deployment.

  4. Use of Tools: Appropriate tools should be employed to manage metadata effectively, including systems for capturing, storing, and retrieving metadata.

  5. Staff Training: Training programs should be established to educate staff about metadata management practices and the significance of the standard.

  6. Continuous Improvement: Mechanisms for ongoing evaluation and enhancement of metadata management practices should be implemented.

Benefits of Implementing ISO/IEC 23751:2022

  1. Improved Data Interoperability: Enhances the ability of different systems to share and utilize data effectively.

  2. Enhanced Data Quality: Provides context and meaning to data, resulting in better data accuracy and reliability.

  3. Regulatory Compliance: Assists organizations in meeting regulatory requirements related to data management.

  4. Increased Efficiency: Streamlines data retrieval processes, allowing for quicker and more informed decision-making.

Implementation Steps

  1. Assessment of Current Practices: Evaluate existing metadata management practices to identify strengths and weaknesses.

  2. Framework Development: Develop a metadata management framework tailored to the organization’s specific needs.

  3. Integration into SDLC: Modify existing processes to ensure that metadata considerations are included at every stage of software development.

  4. Tool Implementation: Select and implement appropriate tools that support metadata management.

  5. Staff Training: Conduct training sessions to ensure that all relevant personnel understand the principles of metadata management and the specifics of ISO/IEC 23751:2022.

  6. Ongoing Monitoring: Establish processes for the continuous assessment and improvement of metadata management practices.

Conclusion

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 provides a vital framework for organizations to enhance their metadata management practices. By adhering to the guidelines and requirements set forth in this standard, organizations can improve data quality, enhance interoperability, and ensure compliance with regulatory standards. As the role of data in decision-making continues to grow, effective metadata management will be crucial for achieving organizational goals.

What is required ISO/IEC 23751:2022 Information technology

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 outlines requirements for the management of metadata in information technology, particularly in the context of software and systems engineering. Here’s a detailed breakdown of what is required by this standard:

Requirements of ISO/IEC 23751:2022

  1. Establishment of a Metadata Framework:

    • Organizations must develop a comprehensive framework for managing metadata throughout the lifecycle of software and systems. This framework should facilitate the consistent and coherent use of metadata.

  2. Definitions and Standards for Metadata:

    • Clear definitions and classifications for various metadata elements should be established to ensure uniformity across projects and systems. This includes defining terms, types, and formats relevant to the metadata being managed.

  3. Integration into Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC):

    • Metadata management processes should be integrated at every phase of the SDLC, including requirements analysis, design, implementation, testing, deployment, and maintenance. This ensures that metadata is consistently handled throughout the project lifecycle.

  4. Selection of Appropriate Tools:

    • Organizations should identify and utilize appropriate tools and technologies to support metadata management. These tools should facilitate the capture, storage, retrieval, and analysis of metadata.

  5. Training and Awareness Programs:

    • It is essential to implement training programs for personnel involved in metadata management to enhance their understanding of its importance and the specific practices mandated by the standard.

  6. Quality Assurance Measures:

    • Organizations should establish processes for monitoring and evaluating the quality of metadata. This includes defining metrics for assessing metadata accuracy, completeness, and relevance.

  7. Governance and Policy Development:

    • Clear governance structures and policies must be defined to oversee metadata management practices. This includes identifying roles and responsibilities within the organization for managing and maintaining metadata.

  8. Continuous Improvement:

    • Mechanisms for continuous evaluation and improvement of metadata management practices should be implemented. Organizations should regularly review their processes to adapt to new technologies, methodologies, and regulatory requirements.

Summary

In summary, ISO/IEC 23751:2022 sets forth requirements aimed at enhancing the management of metadata in IT environments. By establishing a clear framework, integrating practices into the SDLC, and focusing on continuous improvement, organizations can significantly enhance data quality, interoperability, and overall efficiency in their information management processes.

Who is required ISO/IEC 23751:2022 Information technology

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 applies to a range of stakeholders in the field of information technology, particularly those involved in software and systems engineering. Here’s a breakdown of who is required to adhere to this standard:

Who is Required to Comply with ISO/IEC 23751:2022?

  1. Software Development Organizations:

    • Companies engaged in developing software products and applications must implement the standard to enhance metadata management practices throughout their development processes.

  2. IT Service Providers:

    • Organizations providing IT services, such as cloud computing, data management, and IT consulting, are required to adopt the standard to ensure effective metadata management in their offerings.

  3. System Integrators:

    • Entities that integrate various IT systems and software components must comply with ISO/IEC 23751:2022 to ensure that metadata is consistently managed across different platforms and applications.

  4. Data Management Professionals:

    • Professionals responsible for data governance, data quality, and data management within organizations should follow the standard to enhance the overall management of metadata associated with data assets.

  5. Quality Assurance Teams:

    • Teams focused on ensuring the quality of software and systems should implement the practices outlined in the standard to enhance the accuracy and relevance of metadata used in testing and validation.

  6. Project Managers and Stakeholders:

    • Individuals involved in project management and oversight of software and systems development projects are encouraged to adhere to the standard to ensure that metadata considerations are integrated into project planning and execution.

  7. Regulatory Bodies:

    • Organizations that set regulatory standards or guidelines for IT practices may require compliance with ISO/IEC 23751:2022 to ensure that metadata management practices meet industry standards and legal requirements.

  8. Educational Institutions:

    • Academic institutions offering courses in software engineering, data management, and IT should incorporate the principles of ISO/IEC 23751:2022 into their curricula to prepare students for industry standards.

Conclusion

In summary, compliance with ISO/IEC 23751:2022 is relevant for various stakeholders involved in information technology and software development. By adopting the standard, these organizations and professionals can improve their metadata management practices, leading to better data quality, interoperability, and efficiency in their operations.

When is required ISO/IEC 23751:2022 Information technology

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 is required in several contexts, primarily related to the management of metadata in information technology and software development. Here are specific scenarios when compliance with this standard is necessary:

When is ISO/IEC 23751:2022 Required?

  1. Project Initiation:

    • When starting a new software development project, organizations should incorporate the standard to establish a metadata management framework from the outset.

  2. Development Lifecycle:

    • During the software development lifecycle (SDLC), organizations are required to follow the guidelines of ISO/IEC 23751:2022 at every phase, including planning, design, implementation, testing, deployment, and maintenance.

  3. Data Governance Implementation:

    • When implementing data governance strategies, organizations need to align their metadata management practices with the standard to ensure consistency and compliance with best practices.

  4. Integration of New Technologies:

    • If an organization adopts new technologies or tools that impact metadata management, compliance with the standard ensures that these integrations adhere to established practices.

  5. Quality Assurance Processes:

    • During the quality assurance and testing phases of software development, the standard is required to ensure that metadata is accurately captured and assessed for quality.

  6. Regulatory Compliance:

    • Organizations operating in regulated industries (e.g., finance, healthcare) may be required to follow ISO/IEC 23751:2022 to meet specific legal and regulatory standards concerning data management.

  7. Continuous Improvement Initiatives:

    • When organizations undertake initiatives aimed at improving their data management and software development processes, compliance with the standard is necessary to ensure systematic improvement.

  8. Metadata Management Training:

    • Training programs for personnel involved in metadata management should align with ISO/IEC 23751:2022 to provide consistent and relevant knowledge.

Conclusion

In summary, ISO/IEC 23751:2022 is required whenever organizations engage in activities that involve metadata management within software development and IT services. By adhering to the standard, organizations can enhance the quality and interoperability of their data, ultimately leading to more efficient and effective information management practices.

Where is required ISO/IEC 23751:2022 Information technology

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 is relevant in various contexts within the field of information technology, specifically concerning software and systems engineering. Here are the key areas and environments where compliance with this standard is required:

Where ISO/IEC 23751:2022 is Required

1. Software Development Organizations

  • Development Environments: Companies involved in developing software solutions need to implement the standard within their development environments to manage metadata effectively across projects.

2. Systems Engineering Companies

  • Engineering Departments: Organizations that focus on systems engineering are required to adopt the standard in their engineering processes to ensure comprehensive metadata management.

3. IT Service Providers

  • Service Delivery Settings: IT service providers must apply the standard in service delivery contexts, particularly when they develop, implement, or maintain software systems for clients.

4. Project Management Offices (PMOs)

  • Project Management Frameworks: PMOs within organizations should integrate ISO/IEC 23751:2022 into their project management frameworks to ensure consistency in metadata handling across different projects.

5. Quality Assurance and Testing Facilities

  • Testing Labs: Quality assurance teams and testing labs should use the standard to manage and utilize metadata for evaluating software performance and compliance during testing phases.

6. Research and Development (R&D) Departments

  • Innovation Projects: R&D departments involved in software and systems innovations can implement the standard to capture relevant metadata that supports new product development and process improvement.

7. Educational Institutions

  • Curricula Development: Educational institutions teaching software and systems engineering can adopt the standard in their curricula to prepare students for real-world applications of metadata management.

8. Regulatory and Compliance Organizations

  • Industry Standards: Regulatory bodies and industry compliance organizations may reference ISO/IEC 23751:2022 in their guidelines, making it necessary for organizations in regulated industries to adhere to the standard.

Summary

In summary, ISO/IEC 23751:2022 is required in various environments, including software development organizations, systems engineering firms, IT service providers, project management offices, quality assurance facilities, research and development departments, educational institutions, and regulatory organizations. Compliance with this standard helps ensure effective metadata management and interoperability across different systems and processes in the field of information technology.

How is required ISO/IEC 23751:2022 Information technology

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 outlines specific requirements for managing metadata in information technology, particularly in the context of software and systems engineering. Here’s an overview of how compliance with this standard is typically achieved:

How ISO/IEC 23751:2022 is Required

1. Establishing a Metadata Management Framework

  • Framework Development: Organizations must create a structured framework for managing metadata throughout the software development and systems engineering lifecycle, incorporating the guidelines set forth in the standard.

2. Integration into Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC)

  • SDLC Integration: The standard should be integrated into various stages of the SDLC, including planning, design, development, testing, deployment, and maintenance, to ensure that metadata is effectively captured and utilized.

3. Defining Metadata Elements

  • Metadata Specification: Organizations are required to define specific metadata elements relevant to their projects, such as data types, formats, relationships, and usage contexts, in accordance with the standard.

4. Implementing Tools and Technologies

  • Tool Selection: The use of tools that support metadata management practices outlined in the standard is necessary. Organizations should select and implement software tools that facilitate effective metadata capture, storage, and retrieval.

5. Training and Awareness

  • Staff Training: It is essential to train employees on the importance of metadata management and the specifics of ISO/IEC 23751:2022 to ensure that all team members are aligned with the standard’s requirements.

6. Quality Assurance Processes

  • Verification and Validation: Incorporate quality assurance processes to verify that metadata is accurately captured and validated throughout the project lifecycle, ensuring compliance with the standard.

7. Continuous Improvement

  • Feedback Mechanism: Organizations should establish a continuous improvement process that allows for the evaluation and refinement of metadata management practices based on feedback and changing project requirements.

8. Documentation and Reporting

  • Documentation Standards: Proper documentation of metadata management processes, as well as reporting mechanisms for tracking compliance with the standard, is crucial for ensuring transparency and accountability.

9. Interoperability and Standardization

  • Interoperability Practices: Adopt practices that enhance interoperability between different software tools and systems by aligning metadata management with industry standards, as defined by ISO/IEC 23751:2022.

Summary

In summary, compliance with ISO/IEC 23751:2022 is achieved through the establishment of a comprehensive metadata management framework that integrates into the software development lifecycle, defines specific metadata elements, employs appropriate tools, provides training, incorporates quality assurance, emphasizes continuous improvement, maintains documentation, and ensures interoperability. Adhering to these requirements helps organizations effectively manage metadata, enhancing the quality and efficiency of their software and systems engineering processes.

Case Study on ISO/IEC 23751:2022 Information technology

Case Study: Implementing ISO/IEC 23751:2022 in a Software Development Company

Background

Company: TechInnovate Solutions
Industry: Software Development
Location: Global

Overview:
TechInnovate Solutions is a mid-sized software development firm specializing in custom enterprise solutions. The company faced challenges related to inconsistent metadata management across various projects, leading to difficulties in interoperability, data retrieval, and regulatory compliance. To address these issues, TechInnovate decided to implement ISO/IEC 23751:2022, which provides guidelines for managing metadata in software and systems engineering.

Challenge

Prior to implementing ISO/IEC 23751:2022, TechInnovate encountered several challenges:

  1. Inconsistent Metadata Practices: Different teams used varying formats and definitions for metadata, leading to confusion and inefficiencies.

  2. Poor Interoperability: Metadata discrepancies hindered integration between systems, causing delays in project delivery.

  3. Quality Assurance Issues: Lack of standardized metadata made it difficult to validate and verify software components effectively.

  4. Regulatory Compliance Risks: The absence of a unified metadata strategy raised concerns about compliance with industry regulations.

Implementation Process

Step 1: Assessment and Planning

  • Initial Assessment: Conducted an audit of existing metadata practices across all teams.

  • Stakeholder Engagement: Engaged key stakeholders to identify specific metadata needs and challenges.

  • Action Plan: Developed a detailed action plan outlining the steps to align with ISO/IEC 23751:2022.

Step 2: Developing a Metadata Management Framework

  • Framework Creation: Established a comprehensive metadata management framework tailored to the organization’s needs.

  • Metadata Elements Definition: Defined key metadata elements, including data types, formats, and usage contexts.

Step 3: Integration into the SDLC

  • SDLC Modification: Integrated metadata management practices into the software development lifecycle, ensuring all phases from planning to maintenance included metadata considerations.

  • Tool Implementation: Adopted tools that support effective metadata capture, storage, and retrieval.

Step 4: Training and Awareness

  • Training Programs: Conducted training sessions for all staff on the importance of metadata management and the specifics of ISO/IEC 23751:2022.

  • Resource Materials: Created documentation and resource materials to guide teams in implementing metadata practices.

Step 5: Continuous Improvement

  • Feedback Loop: Established a feedback mechanism to continuously evaluate and improve metadata management practices.

  • Regular Audits: Scheduled regular audits to ensure compliance with the ISO/IEC 23751:2022 standards.

Results

After implementing ISO/IEC 23751:2022, TechInnovate Solutions experienced significant improvements:

  1. Enhanced Consistency: Standardized metadata practices across all teams, leading to improved consistency in data handling.

  2. Improved Interoperability: Better integration between systems facilitated smoother project delivery and collaboration.

  3. Higher Quality Assurance: Streamlined validation processes resulted in higher quality software products with fewer defects.

  4. Regulatory Compliance: Strengthened compliance with industry regulations, reducing risks associated with audits and reviews.

  5. Increased Efficiency: Reduced time spent on data retrieval and management, allowing teams to focus more on development and innovation.

Conclusion

The successful implementation of ISO/IEC 23751:2022 at Tech Innovate Solutions demonstrates the value of standardized metadata management in enhancing software development processes. By adopting the guidelines, the company improved its operational efficiency, ensured regulatory compliance, and positioned itself for future growth and innovation in the competitive software development landscape.

White Paper on ISO/IEC 23751:2022 Information technology

Introduction

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 is a vital standard in the realm of information technology, specifically focusing on the management of metadata in software and systems engineering. As organizations increasingly rely on data-driven decision-making and interoperability between systems, effective metadata management has become essential. This white paper aims to provide an overview of ISO/IEC 23751:2022, its significance, requirements, and best practices for implementation.

Understanding Metadata

What is Metadata?

Metadata is data that provides information about other data. It serves as a descriptive layer that enables better organization, retrieval, and understanding of data within a system. Metadata can include various types of information, such as:

  • Descriptive Metadata: Information that describes the content, context, and characteristics of the data.

  • Structural Metadata: Information about the organization of data and how it is structured, such as file formats and relationships between data elements.

  • Administrative Metadata: Information that facilitates the management of data, including ownership, access rights, and data lifecycle.

Importance of Metadata Management

Effective metadata management is crucial for several reasons:

  • Data Interoperability: Ensures that different systems can exchange and interpret data accurately.

  • Data Quality: Enhances the quality of data by providing context and meaning, reducing ambiguity.

  • Regulatory Compliance: Supports adherence to industry regulations and standards by maintaining accurate and consistent metadata records.

  • Efficient Data Retrieval: Improves the ability to locate and retrieve data quickly, facilitating data-driven decision-making.

Overview of ISO/IEC 23751:2022

Scope and Objectives

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 provides guidelines for organizations to manage metadata effectively within software and systems engineering projects. The primary objectives of the standard are to:

  1. Define Metadata Elements: Establish clear definitions and formats for metadata elements to promote consistency and interoperability.

  2. Integrate Metadata Management into SDLC: Encourage the integration of metadata management practices throughout the software development lifecycle.

  3. Promote Best Practices: Offer best practices for capturing, storing, and utilizing metadata to enhance data quality and accessibility.

Key Requirements

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 outlines several key requirements for organizations, including:

  1. Framework Development: Organizations must establish a comprehensive framework for managing metadata that aligns with the standard’s principles.

  2. Metadata Element Definition: Specific metadata elements must be defined, ensuring clarity and consistency across projects.

  3. Integration in SDLC: Metadata management practices should be integrated into all phases of the software development lifecycle.

  4. Tool Utilization: Organizations are encouraged to utilize appropriate tools to facilitate effective metadata management.

  5. Training and Awareness: Staff training on metadata management principles and practices is essential for successful implementation.

  6. Continuous Improvement: Establish mechanisms for continuous evaluation and enhancement of metadata management practices.

Implementation Best Practices

Step 1: Assess Current Practices

Conduct a thorough assessment of existing metadata management practices to identify gaps and areas for improvement. This includes evaluating how metadata is currently captured, stored, and utilized across projects.

Step 2: Develop a Metadata Management Framework

Create a tailored metadata management framework that outlines the organization’s approach to metadata. This framework should include definitions of metadata elements, standards for capturing and storing metadata, and guidelines for usage.

Step 3: Integrate into SDLC

Ensure that metadata management practices are embedded into the software development lifecycle. This involves modifying existing processes to include metadata considerations at every stage, from planning to deployment.

Step 4: Implement Tools

Select and implement tools that support effective metadata management. These tools should facilitate the capture, storage, and retrieval of metadata, ensuring compatibility with existing systems.

Step 5: Train Staff

Conduct training sessions for all staff involved in software development and data management. This training should cover the importance of metadata management, the specifics of ISO/IEC 23751:2022, and the tools being used.

Step 6: Monitor and Improve

Establish a feedback mechanism to continuously evaluate metadata management practices. Regular audits and assessments should be conducted to identify areas for improvement and ensure compliance with the standard.

Conclusion

ISO/IEC 23751:2022 serves as a critical framework for organizations seeking to enhance their metadata management practices in software and systems engineering. By adopting the guidelines outlined in the standard, organizations can improve data interoperability, ensure regulatory compliance, and enhance the overall quality of their data management processes. As data continues to play an increasingly central role in decision-making, effective metadata management will remain a cornerstone of successful information technology strategies.

  1. Redman, Thomas C. (30 December 2013). Data Driven: Profiting from Your Most Important Business Asset. Harvard Business Press. ISBN 978-1-4221-6364-1.

  2. ^ Jump up to:a b Fadahunsi, Kayode Philip; Akinlua, James Tosin; O’Connor, Siobhan; Wark, Petra A; Gallagher, Joseph; Carroll, Christopher; Majeed, Azeem; O’Donoghue, John (March 2019). “Protocol for a systematic review and qualitative synthesis of information quality frameworks in eHealth”. BMJ Open. 9 (3): e024722. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024722. ISSN 2044-6055. PMC 6429947. PMID 30842114.

  3. ^ Fadahunsi, Kayode Philip; O’Connor, Siobhan; Akinlua, James Tosin; Wark, Petra A.; Gallagher, Joseph; Carroll, Christopher; Car, Josip; Majeed, Azeem; O’Donoghue, John (2021-05-17). “Information Quality Frameworks for Digital Health Technologies: Systematic Review”. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 23 (5): e23479. doi:10.2196/23479. PMC 8167621. PMID 33835034.

  4. ^ Smallwood, R.F. (2014). Information Governance: Concepts, Strategies, and Best Practices. John Wiley and Sons. p. 110. ISBN 9781118218303. Archived from the original on 2020-07-30. Retrieved 2020-04-18. Having a standardized data governance program in place means cleaning up corrupted or duplicated data and providing users with clean, accurate data as a basis for line-of-business software applications and for decision support analytics in business intelligence (BI) applications.

  5. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Fürber, C. (2015). “3. Data Quality”. Data Quality Management with Semantic Technologies. Springer. pp. 20–55. ISBN 9783658122249. Archived from the original on 31 July 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020.

  6. ^ Jump up to:a b Herzog, T.N.; Scheuren, F.J.; Winkler, W.E. (2007). “Chapter 2: What is data quality and why should we care?”. Data Quality and Record Linkage Techniques. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 7–15. ISBN 9780387695020. Archived from the original on 31 July 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020.

  7. ^ Jump up to:a b Fleckenstein, M.; Fellows, L. (2018). “Chapter 11: Data Quality”. Modern Data Strategy. Springer. pp. 101–120. ISBN 9783319689920. Archived from the original on 31 July 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020.

  8. ^ Jump up to:a b Mahanti, R. (2019). “Chapter 1: Data, Data Quality, and Cost of Poor Data Quality”. Data Quality: Dimensions, Measurement, Strategy, Management, and Governance. Quality Press. pp. 5–6. ISBN 9780873899772. Archived from the original on 23 November 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020.

  9. ^ International Organization for Standardization (September 2015). “ISO 9000:2015(en) Quality management systems — Fundamentals and vocabulary”. International Organization for Standardization. Archived from the original on 19 May 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020.

  10. ^ NIST Big Data Public Working Group, Definitions and Taxonomies Subgroup (October 2019). “NIST Big Data Interoperability Framework: Volume 4, Security and Privacy” (PDF). NIST Special Publication 1500-4r2 (3rd ed.). National Institute of Standards and Technology. doi:10.6028/NIST.SP.1500-4r2. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 May 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020. Validity refers to the usefulness, accuracy, and correctness of data for its application. Traditionally, this has been referred to as data quality.

  11. ^ Jump up to:a b Bian, Jiang; Lyu, Tianchen; Loiacono, Alexander; Viramontes, Tonatiuh Mendoza; Lipori, Gloria; Guo, Yi; Wu, Yonghui; Prosperi, Mattia; George, Thomas J; Harle, Christopher A; Shenkman, Elizabeth A (2020-12-09). “Assessing the practice of data quality evaluation in a national clinical data research network through a systematic scoping review in the era of real-world data”. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 27 (12): 1999–2010. doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaa245. ISSN 1527-974X. PMC 7727392. PMID 33166397.

  12. ^ “Liability and Leverage – A Case for Data Quality”. Information Management. August 2006. Archived from the original on 2011-01-27. Retrieved 2010-06-25.

  13. ^ “Address Management for Mail-Order and Retail”. Directions Magazine. Archived from the original on 2005-04-28. Retrieved 2010-06-25.

  14. ^ “USPS | PostalPro” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2010-02-15. Retrieved 2010-06-25.

  15. ^ E. Curry, A. Freitas, and S. O’Riáin, “The Role of Community-Driven Data Curation for Enterprises”, Archived 2012-01-23 at the Wayback Machine in Linking Enterprise Data, D. Wood, Ed. Boston, Mass.: Springer US, 2010, pp. 25-47.

  16. ^ “ISO/TS 8000-1:2011 Data quality — Part 1: Overview”. International Organization for Standardization. Archived from the original on 21 December 2016. Retrieved 8 December 2016.

  17. ^ “Can you trust the quality of your data?”. spotlessdata.com. Archived from the original on 2017-02-11.

  18. ^ “What is Data Cleansing? – Experian Data Quality”. 13 February 2015. Archived from the original on 11 February 2017. Retrieved 9 February 2017.

  19. ^ “Lecture 23 Data Quality Concepts Tutorial – Data Warehousing”. Watch Free Video Training Online. Archived from the original on 2016-12-21. Retrieved 8 December 2016.

  20. ^ O’Donoghue, John, and John Herbert. “Data management within mHealth environments: Patient sensors, mobile devices, and databases”. Journal of Data and Information Quality (JDIQ) 4.1 (2012): 5.

  21. ^ Huser, Vojtech; DeFalco, Frank J; Schuemie, Martijn; Ryan, Patrick B; Shang, Ning; Velez, Mark; Park, Rae Woong; Boyce, Richard D; Duke, Jon; Khare, Ritu; Utidjian, Levon; Bailey, Charles (30 November 2016). “Multisite Evaluation of a Data Quality Tool for Patient-Level Clinical Datasets”. eGEMs. 4 (1): 24. doi:10.13063/2327-9214.1239. PMC 5226382. PMID 28154833.

  22. ^ MEASURE Evaluation. (2017) Improving data quality in mobile community-based health information systems: Guidelines for design and implementation (tr-17-182). Chapel Hill, NC: MEASURE Evaluation, University of North Carolina. Retrieved from https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/tr-17-182 Archived 2017-08-08 at the Wayback Machine

  23. ^ Wambugu, S. & Villella, C. (2016). mHealth for health information systems in low- and middle-income countries: Challenges and opportunities in data quality, privacy, and security (tr-16-140). Chapel Hill, NC: MEASURE Evaluation, University of North Carolina. Retrieved from https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/tr-16-140 Archived 2017-08-08 at the Wayback Machine

  24. ^ MEASURE Evaluation. (2016) Data quality for monitoring and evaluation systems (fs-16-170). Chapel Hill, NC: MEASURE Evaluation, University of North Carolina. Retrieved from https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/fs-16-170-en Archived 2017-08-08 at the Wayback Machine

  25. ^ MEASURE Evaluation. (2016). Routine health information systems: A curriculum on basic concepts and practice – Syllabus (sr-16-135a). Chapel Hill, NC: MEASURE Evaluation, University of North Carolina. Retrieved from https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/sr-16-135a Archived 2017-08-08 at the Wayback Machine

  26. ^ “Data quality assurance tools”. MEASURE Evaluation. Archived from the original on 8 August 2017. Retrieved 8 August 2017.

  27. ^ “Module 4: RHIS data quality”. MEASURE Evaluation. Archived from the original on 8 August 2017. Retrieved 8 August 2017.

  28. ^ MEASURE Evaluation. “Data quality”. MEASURE Evaluation. Archived from the original on 8 August 2017. Retrieved 8 August 2017.

  29. ^ The World Health Organization (WHO). (2009). Monitoring and evaluation of health systems strengthening. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/healthinfo/HSS_MandE_framework_Nov_2009.pdf Archived 2017-08-28 at the Wayback Machine

  30. ^ Mesgari, Mostafa; Chitu, Okoli; Mehdi, Mohamad; Finn Årup, Nielsen; Lanamäki, Arto (2015). “”The Sum of All Human Knowledge”: A Systematic Review of Scholarly Research on the Content of Wikipedia” (PDF). Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66 (2): 219–245. doi:10.1002/asi.23172. S2CID 218071987. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2020-05-10. Retrieved 2020-01-21.

  31. ^ Warncke-Wang, Morten; Cosley, Dan; Riedl, John (2013). “Tell me more”. Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Open Collaboration. pp. 1–10. doi:10.1145/2491055.2491063. ISBN 9781450318525. S2CID 18523960.

  32. ^ Hasan Dalip, Daniel; André Gonçalves, Marcos; Cristo, Marco; Calado, Pável (2009). “Automatic quality assessment of content created collaboratively by web communities”. Proceedings of the 2009 joint international conference on Digital libraries – JCDL ’09. p. 295. doi:10.1145/1555400.1555449. ISBN 9781605583228. S2CID 14421291.

  33. ^ Färber, Michael; Bartscherer, Frederic; Menne, Carsten; Rettinger, Achim (2017-11-30). “Linked data quality of DBpedia, Freebase, OpenCyc, Wikidata, and YAGO”. Semantic Web. 9 (1): 77–129. doi:10.3233/SW-170275. Archived from the original on 2018-01-22.

  34. ^ “Home”. ECCMA. Archived from the original on 2018-08-19. Retrieved 2018-10-03.

  35.  “educational institution – Dictionary Definition”. Vocabulary.com. Archived from the original on 2017-09-10. Retrieved 2017-07-17.

  36. ^ “educational institution”. The Free Dictionary. Archived from the original on 2017-07-18. Retrieved 2017-07-17.

  37. ^ “How educational institutions’ architecture shapes young minds”. Architectural Digest India. 2021-02-06. Retrieved 2023-10-08.

  38. ^ “Schools As Anchor Institutions – A Community Organizer’s Perspective”. Education – Power – Change. 2023-02-05. Retrieved 2023-10-08.

  39. ^ O’Farrell, Liam; Hassan, Sara; Hoole, Charlotte (2022-12-02). “The university as a Just anchor: universities, anchor networks and participatory research”. Studies in Higher Education. 47 (12): 2405–2416. doi:10.1080/03075079.2022.2072480. ISSN 0307-5079.

  40. Sickles, R., and Zelenyuk, V. (2019). “Measurement of Productivity and Efficiency: Theory and Practice“. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781139565981.

  41. ^ Haie, Naim (2021). “Sefficiency (Sustainable Efficiency)”. Transparent Water Management Theory. Water Resources Development and Management. pp. 39–69. doi:10.1007/978-981-15-6284-6_4. ISBN 978-981-15-6283-9. PMC 7305767.

  42. ^ Stone, Deborah (2012). Policy paradox: the art of political decision making. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc.

  43. ^ میرمهدی, سید احسان (1 August 2024). “10 کتاب برتر برای افزایش کارایی، بهره وری و راندمان”. کباب و کتاب | کتاب، خوشمزه عِینه کباب! (in Persian). Retrieved 31 December 2024.

  44.  Redman, Thomas C. (30 December 2013). Data Driven: Profiting from Your Most Important Business Asset. Harvard Business Press. ISBN 978-1-4221-6364-1.

  45. ^ Jump up to:a b Fadahunsi, Kayode Philip; Akinlua, James Tosin; O’Connor, Siobhan; Wark, Petra A; Gallagher, Joseph; Carroll, Christopher; Majeed, Azeem; O’Donoghue, John (March 2019). “Protocol for a systematic review and qualitative synthesis of information quality frameworks in eHealth”. BMJ Open. 9 (3): e024722. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024722. ISSN 2044-6055. PMC 6429947. PMID 30842114.

  46. ^ Fadahunsi, Kayode Philip; O’Connor, Siobhan; Akinlua, James Tosin; Wark, Petra A.; Gallagher, Joseph; Carroll, Christopher; Car, Josip; Majeed, Azeem; O’Donoghue, John (2021-05-17). “Information Quality Frameworks for Digital Health Technologies: Systematic Review”. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 23 (5): e23479. doi:10.2196/23479. PMC 8167621. PMID 33835034.

  47. ^ Smallwood, R.F. (2014). Information Governance: Concepts, Strategies, and Best Practices. John Wiley and Sons. p. 110. ISBN 9781118218303. Archived from the original on 2020-07-30. Retrieved 2020-04-18. Having a standardized data governance program in place means cleaning up corrupted or duplicated data and providing users with clean, accurate data as a basis for line-of-business software applications and for decision support analytics in business intelligence (BI) applications.

  48. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Fürber, C. (2015). “3. Data Quality”. Data Quality Management with Semantic Technologies. Springer. pp. 20–55. ISBN 9783658122249. Archived from the original on 31 July 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020.

  49. ^ Jump up to:a b Herzog, T.N.; Scheuren, F.J.; Winkler, W.E. (2007). “Chapter 2: What is data quality and why should we care?”. Data Quality and Record Linkage Techniques. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 7–15. ISBN 9780387695020. Archived from the original on 31 July 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020.

  50. ^ Jump up to:a b Fleckenstein, M.; Fellows, L. (2018). “Chapter 11: Data Quality”. Modern Data Strategy. Springer. pp. 101–120. ISBN 9783319689920. Archived from the original on 31 July 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020.

  51. ^ Jump up to:a b Mahanti, R. (2019). “Chapter 1: Data, Data Quality, and Cost of Poor Data Quality”. Data Quality: Dimensions, Measurement, Strategy, Management, and Governance. Quality Press. pp. 5–6. ISBN 9780873899772. Archived from the original on 23 November 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020.

  52. ^ International Organization for Standardization (September 2015). “ISO 9000:2015(en) Quality management systems — Fundamentals and vocabulary”. International Organization for Standardization. Archived from the original on 19 May 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020.

  53. ^ NIST Big Data Public Working Group, Definitions and Taxonomies Subgroup (October 2019). “NIST Big Data Interoperability Framework: Volume 4, Security and Privacy” (PDF). NIST Special Publication 1500-4r2 (3rd ed.). National Institute of Standards and Technology. doi:10.6028/NIST.SP.1500-4r2. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 May 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2020. Validity refers to the usefulness, accuracy, and correctness of data for its application. Traditionally, this has been referred to as data quality.

  54. ^ Jump up to:a b Bian, Jiang; Lyu, Tianchen; Loiacono, Alexander; Viramontes, Tonatiuh Mendoza; Lipori, Gloria; Guo, Yi; Wu, Yonghui; Prosperi, Mattia; George, Thomas J; Harle, Christopher A; Shenkman, Elizabeth A (2020-12-09). “Assessing the practice of data quality evaluation in a national clinical data research network through a systematic scoping review in the era of real-world data”. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 27 (12): 1999–2010. doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaa245. ISSN 1527-974X. PMC 7727392. PMID 33166397.

  55. ^ “Liability and Leverage – A Case for Data Quality”. Information Management. August 2006. Archived from the original on 2011-01-27. Retrieved 2010-06-25.

  56. ^ “Address Management for Mail-Order and Retail”. Directions Magazine. Archived from the original on 2005-04-28. Retrieved 2010-06-25.

  57. ^ “USPS | PostalPro” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2010-02-15. Retrieved 2010-06-25.

  58. ^ E. Curry, A. Freitas, and S. O’Riáin, “The Role of Community-Driven Data Curation for Enterprises”, Archived 2012-01-23 at the Wayback Machine in Linking Enterprise Data, D. Wood, Ed. Boston, Mass.: Springer US, 2010, pp. 25-47.

  59. ^ “ISO/TS 8000-1:2011 Data quality — Part 1: Overview”. International Organization for Standardization. Archived from the original on 21 December 2016. Retrieved 8 December 2016.

  60. ^ “Can you trust the quality of your data?”. spotlessdata.com. Archived from the original on 2017-02-11.

  61. ^ “What is Data Cleansing? – Experian Data Quality”. 13 February 2015. Archived from the original on 11 February 2017. Retrieved 9 February 2017.

  62. ^ “Lecture 23 Data Quality Concepts Tutorial – Data Warehousing”. Watch Free Video Training Online. Archived from the original on 2016-12-21. Retrieved 8 December 2016.

  63. ^ O’Donoghue, John, and John Herbert. “Data management within mHealth environments: Patient sensors, mobile devices, and databases”. Journal of Data and Information Quality (JDIQ) 4.1 (2012): 5.

  64. ^ Huser, Vojtech; DeFalco, Frank J; Schuemie, Martijn; Ryan, Patrick B; Shang, Ning; Velez, Mark; Park, Rae Woong; Boyce, Richard D; Duke, Jon; Khare, Ritu; Utidjian, Levon; Bailey, Charles (30 November 2016). “Multisite Evaluation of a Data Quality Tool for Patient-Level Clinical Datasets”. eGEMs. 4 (1): 24. doi:10.13063/2327-9214.1239. PMC 5226382. PMID 28154833.

  65. ^ MEASURE Evaluation. (2017) Improving data quality in mobile community-based health information systems: Guidelines for design and implementation (tr-17-182). Chapel Hill, NC: MEASURE Evaluation, University of North Carolina. Retrieved from https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/tr-17-182 Archived 2017-08-08 at the Wayback Machine

  66. ^ Wambugu, S. & Villella, C. (2016). mHealth for health information systems in low- and middle-income countries: Challenges and opportunities in data quality, privacy, and security (tr-16-140). Chapel Hill, NC: MEASURE Evaluation, University of North Carolina. Retrieved from https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/tr-16-140 Archived 2017-08-08 at the Wayback Machine

  67. ^ MEASURE Evaluation. (2016) Data quality for monitoring and evaluation systems (fs-16-170). Chapel Hill, NC: MEASURE Evaluation, University of North Carolina. Retrieved from https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/fs-16-170-en Archived 2017-08-08 at the Wayback Machine

  68. ^ MEASURE Evaluation. (2016). Routine health information systems: A curriculum on basic concepts and practice – Syllabus (sr-16-135a). Chapel Hill, NC: MEASURE Evaluation, University of North Carolina. Retrieved from https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/sr-16-135a Archived 2017-08-08 at the Wayback Machine

  69. ^ “Data quality assurance tools”. MEASURE Evaluation. Archived from the original on 8 August 2017. Retrieved 8 August 2017.

  70. ^ “Module 4: RHIS data quality”. MEASURE Evaluation. Archived from the original on 8 August 2017. Retrieved 8 August 2017.

  71. ^ MEASURE Evaluation. “Data quality”. MEASURE Evaluation. Archived from the original on 8 August 2017. Retrieved 8 August 2017.

  72. ^ The World Health Organization (WHO). (2009). Monitoring and evaluation of health systems strengthening. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/healthinfo/HSS_MandE_framework_Nov_2009.pdf Archived 2017-08-28 at the Wayback Machine

  73. ^ Mesgari, Mostafa; Chitu, Okoli; Mehdi, Mohamad; Finn Årup, Nielsen; Lanamäki, Arto (2015). “”The Sum of All Human Knowledge”: A Systematic Review of Scholarly Research on the Content of Wikipedia” (PDF). Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66 (2): 219–245. doi:10.1002/asi.23172. S2CID 218071987. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2020-05-10. Retrieved 2020-01-21.

  74. ^ Warncke-Wang, Morten; Cosley, Dan; Riedl, John (2013). “Tell me more”. Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Open Collaboration. pp. 1–10. doi:10.1145/2491055.2491063. ISBN 9781450318525. S2CID 18523960.

  75. ^ Hasan Dalip, Daniel; André Gonçalves, Marcos; Cristo, Marco; Calado, Pável (2009). “Automatic quality assessment of content created collaboratively by web communities”. Proceedings of the 2009 joint international conference on Digital libraries – JCDL ’09. p. 295. doi:10.1145/1555400.1555449. ISBN 9781605583228. S2CID 14421291.

  76. ^ Färber, Michael; Bartscherer, Frederic; Menne, Carsten; Rettinger, Achim (2017-11-30). “Linked data quality of DBpedia, Freebase, OpenCyc, Wikidata, and YAGO”. Semantic Web. 9 (1): 77–129. doi:10.3233/SW-170275. Archived from the original on 2018-01-22.

  77. ^ “Home”. ECCMA. Archived from the original on 2018-08-19. Retrieved 2018-10-03.

Translate »
× How can I help you?