STARS framework
This page evaluates the extent to which the original study meets the recommendations from the STARS framework for the sharing of code and associated materials from discrete-event simulation models (Monks, Harper, and Mustafee (2024)).
Of the 8 essential STARS components:
- 2 were met fully (✅)
- 6 were not met (❌)
Of the 5 optional STARS components:
- 5 were not met (❌)
| Component | Description | Met by study? | Evidence/location |
|---|---|---|---|
| Essential components | |||
| Open license | Free and open-source software (FOSS) license (e.g. MIT, GNU Public License (GPL)) | ❌ Not met | Not provided when published |
| Dependency management | Specify software libraries, version numbers and sources (e.g. dependency management tools like virtualenv, conda, poetry) | ❌ Not met | - |
| FOSS model | Coded in FOSS language (e.g. R, Julia, Python) | ✅ Fully | Python |
| Minimum documentation | Minimal instructions (e.g. in README) that overview (a) what model does, (b) how to install and run model to obtain results, and (c) how to vary parameters to run new experiments | ❌ Not met | - |
| ORCID | ORCID for each study author | ❌ Not met | No ORCID in the repository (though Varun Ramamohan does have ORCID ID with publication in SIMULATION) |
| Citation information | Instructions on how to cite the research artefact (e.g. CITATION.cff file) | ❌ Not met | - |
| Remote code repository | Code available in a remote code repository (e.g. GitHub, GitLab, BitBucket) | ✅ Fully | Available on GitHub: https://github.com/shoaibiocl/PHC- |
| Open science archive | Code stored in an open science archive with FORCE11 compliant citation and guaranteed persistance of digital artefacts (e.g. Figshare, Zenodo, the Open Science Framework (OSF), and the Computational Modeling in the Social and Ecological Sciences Network (CoMSES Net)) | ❌ Not met | - |
| Optional components | |||
| Enhanced documentation | Open and high quality documentation on how the model is implemented and works (e.g. via notebooks and markdown files, brought together using software like Quarto and Jupyter Book). Suggested content includes: • Plain english summary of project and model • Clarifying license • Citation instructions • Contribution instructions • Model installation instructions • Structured code walk through of model • Documentation of modelling cycle using TRACE • Annotated simulation reporting guidelines • Clear description of model validation including its intended purpose |
❌ Not met | - |
| Documentation hosting | Host documentation (e.g. with GitHub pages, GitLab pages, BitBucket Cloud, Quarto Pub) | ❌ Not met | - |
| Online coding environment | Provide an online environment where users can run and change code (e.g. BinderHub, Google Colaboratory, Deepnote) | ❌ Not met | - |
| Model interface | Provide web application interface to the model so it is accessible to less technical simulation users | ❌ Not met | - |
| Web app hosting | Host web app online (e.g. Streamlit Community Cloud, ShinyApps hosting) | ❌ Not met | - |
Note: For this study, they have not met the criteria for an open license as this wasn’t originally included with their code when it was published. However, upon request, they have kindly add one to their repository, which allowed us to use their code in this study.
References
Monks, Thomas, Alison Harper, and Navonil Mustafee. 2024. “Towards Sharing Tools and Artefacts for Reusable Simulations in Healthcare.” Journal of Simulation 0 (0): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/17477778.2024.2347882.