PID strategies are being written around the world right now, and the decisions being made will shape the scholarly record for decades. After 25 years running open scholarly infrastructure—now on behalf of 25,000 members in 167 countries—Crossref has an informed perspective on what those decisions should ideally rest on. Today we’re setting it out in our’s first position paper: Persistent identifiers in research infrastructure policy: the need for a holistic approach. You can read it online or download the PDF; it’s a 16-minute read.
Research is rarely limited to a single contributor performing a single role. Behind every research output are people contributing in various ways: software development, data analyses, methodology design, and much more. Often, the same person contributes in several of these ways. Until now, Crossref metadata could only capture part of that picture, but this is changing with Schema 5.5.
Through user experience research (UXR) initiatives that take into account our diverse membership and community, we can have a continuous, deeper understanding of the role of metadata in our members’ workflows, and ensure that our work continues to meet our community’s needs. Your support is the key to this process, and will positively impact the wider community - and if you’d like to start today, you can take part in our latest initiative: help us improve our Events page by sharing your thoughts on the page’s feedback form.
Our 2026 Community Update took place on 13 May. Two calls, one for the eastern and one for the western time zone, highlighted how our global community is growing, how we’re refining the metadata that supports trust in the scholarly record, and connecting records more effectively through our latest tools.
Why metadata matters for research integrity and jow to contribute
Some aspects of research integrity depend on accurate, complete, and connected metadata. This joint guide from Crossref and DataCite sets out the metadata elements most critical for assessing research integrity—and how all stakeholders can contribute to and benefit from a richer, more trustworthy scholarly record.
Strategists
Understand why metadata is infrastructure for research integrity.
Why completeness, accuracy, and openness across the scholarly record matters for systemic trust in research.
Decision-makers
Know which metadata elements to require, check, and act on.
A practical resource for publishers, funders, and institutions making metadata-related policy decisions.
Practitioners
Learn how to deposit, enrich, and query research integrity metadata.
Step-by-step guidance using Crossref and DataCite services and open APIs.
What this guide covers
This guide walks through the key metadata elements that enable research integrity assessment, and explains how to contribute them via Crossref and DataCite:
Contributors and their roles—identifying who did what
Affiliations—linking researchers to institutions
Dates—submission, acceptance, publication, and update dates
Funder, funding, and grant information—transparency on who paid for the research
Versioning—tracking how a work has changed over time
Retractions, corrections, and updates—keeping the record accurate
Abstracts and descriptions—what the work is actually about
Clinical trials—registration and reporting
References—connecting works to what they cite
Peer reviews—when and how work was reviewed
Publisher and steward—accountability for the record
Record and resource types—what kind of object is this?
Relationships and related identifiers—linking datasets, preprints, articles, and more
Rights, licences, and access—how the work can be used
The guide also sets out a call to action for each stakeholder group: how to enrich your records, query existing metadata via APIs, and report inconsistencies.
Amdekar, M., Chen, X., Cousijn, H., El-Gebali, S., Feeney, P., Hendricks, G., & Stathis, K. (2026, April). Why metadata matters for research integrity and how to contribute. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19695957
