Common characteristics of open source software development and applicability for drug discovery: a systematic review

Årdal Christine, Alstadsæter Annette, Røttingen, Røttingen John-Arne

Description

Innovation through an open source model has proven to be successful for software development. This success has led many to speculate if open source can be applied to other industries with similar success. We attempt to provide an understanding of open source software development characteristics for researchers, business leaders and government officials who may be interested in utilizing open source innovation in other contexts and with an emphasis on drug discovery. Methods A systematic review was performed by searching relevant, multidisciplinary databases to extract empirical research regarding the common characteristics and barriers of initiating and maintaining an open source software development project. Results Common characteristics to open source software development pertinent to open source drug discovery were extracted. The characteristics were then grouped into the areas of participant attraction, management of volunteers, control mechanisms, legal framework and physical constraints. Lastly, their applicability to drug discovery was examined. Conclusions We believe that the open source model is viable for drug discovery, although it is unlikely that it will exactly follow the form used in software development. Hybrids will likely develop that suit the unique characteristics of drug discovery. We suggest potential motivations for organizations to join an open source drug discovery project. We also examine specific differences between software and medicines, specifically how the need for laboratories and physical goods will impact the model as well as the effect of patents.

Sujets

• Open source
• Drug discovery
• Neglected diseases

Informations

• Publié par: biomed
• Publié le: 01 janvier 2011
• Nombre de lectures: 22
• Langue: English

Extrait

Årdal et al. Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9:36
http://www.health-policy-systems.com/content/9/1/36
RESEARCH Open Access
Common characteristics of open source software
development and applicability for drug discovery:
a systematic review
1* 2 2Christine Årdal , Annette Alstadsæter and John-Arne Røttingen
Abstract
Background: Innovation through an open source model has proven to be successful for software development.
This success has led many to speculate if open source can be applied to other industries with similar success. We
attempt to provide an understanding of open source software development characteristics for researchers, business
leaders and government officials who may be interested in utilizing open source innovation in other contexts and
with an emphasis on drug discovery.
Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching relevant, multidisciplinary databases to extract
empirical research regarding the common characteristics and barriers of initiating and maintaining an open source
software development project.
Results: Common characteristics to open source software development pertinent to open source drug discovery
were extracted. The characteristics were then grouped into the areas of participant attraction, management of
volunteers, control mechanisms, legal framework and physical constraints. Lastly, their applicability to drug
discovery was examined.
Conclusions: We believe that the open source model is viable for drug discovery, although it is unlikely that it will
exactly follow the form used in software development. Hybrids will likely develop that suit the unique
characteristics of drug discovery. We suggest potential motivations for organizations to join an open source drug
discovery project. We also examine specific differences between software and medicines, specifically how the need
for laboratories and physical goods will impact the model as well as the effect of patents.
Keywords: open source, drug discovery, pharmaceutical innovation, neglected diseases
Background Pharmaceuticals are an often mentioned example for
posInnovation through an open source model has proven to sible transfer and adaptation. The World Health
Organizabe successful for software development. Well-known tion’s Consultative Expert Working Group for Research
examples such as the Linux operating system and and Development Financing and Coordination has been
Apache web server have demonstrated that open source requested to evaluate open source drug discovery. There
methods can create market leaders [1,2]. are also several open source drug discovery projects
This success has led many to speculate if open source already underway. The Synaptic Leap hosts a project to
develop a new synthesis of the schistosomiasis drug, prazi-can be applied to other industries with similar success.
The ingredients of open source generally deemed attrac- quantel, and CSIR Team India Consortium hosts a project
tive for transfer are the collaborative nature of develop- identifying new targets for tuberculosis. These projects
ment and the open access to the intellectual property. attempt to link up like-minded scientists globally to
develop new drugs quickly without high, patent-protected
prices, making medicines more accessible.
* Correspondence: [e-mail]
1 This is a simplistic and ideal description of a potentialThe Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, P.O.Box 7004, St.
Olavs plass, N-0130 Oslo, Norway utilization of open source. To discuss the applicability of
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© 2011 Årdal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in
any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Årdal et al. Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9:36 Page 2 of 16
http://www.health-policy-systems.com/content/9/1/36
open source to other contexts seriously, we need to A concept closely related to open source is “free
softunderstand more about the phenomenon. This paper ware”. It is fundamentally the same as open source but
attempts to analyze the existing, empirical research with a political twist - adherents to free software believe
regarding open source software development and single thatallsoftwareshouldbemadefreelyavailableand
out those characteristics that are important when that proprietary software should not exist. The Open
designing and building new open source models. We Source Community takes a more flexible approach,
attempt to present the evidence in such a way that it is allowing proprietary software to use open source
comuseful for researchers, business leaders or government ponents so long as the license allows for it. Sometimes
the two terms are combined in FLOSS (free/libre/openofficials who may be interested in applying the concepts
of open source to novel areas. We apply our findings source software).
specifically to drug discovery. “Open innovation” conveys a much broader idea than
We have chosen a multidisciplinary and mixed-meth- open source. University of California at Berkeley’s Henry
ods systematic review to present the research. A multi- Chesbrough has championed open innovation, which
disciplinary approach allows for the examination of a encourages companies to actively supplement their
wide range of research evaluated from multiple perspec- internal knowledge stocks with external sources [5].
tives - economic, legal, software engineering, etc. A sys- Instead of relying solely on internal research, companies
tematic review is a method of evaluating large bodies of that follow open innovation business models actively
evidence in a systematic, transparent and reproducible purchase or license ideas from external organizations
manner [3]. The aim is to give an unbiased reproduction and/or look to the public domain for possible business
of the current evidence addressing the research ques- models. Unlike open source, open innovation may
tion, what are the common characteristics and barriers involve contracting with the intellectual property rights
of open source software development. holder and paying a royalty.
“Open access” is a general term with varying meanings
The myriad of “open” concepts depending upon the context. When used to discuss
conFirstly, it is important to define what we mean by “open tent, it generally means the free access to books,
joursource” as there is a myriad of “open” concepts with nals,media,etc.[6].Thisallowsindividualstoread,
considerable overlap. The Open Source Initiative has copy, print or distribute the materials free-of-charge.
removed much of the ambiguity with “open source” as Unlike open source, it does not allow individuals to
pertaining to software with their 10-point Open Source modify the materials without the author’s consent.
Definition [4], a detailed definition giving ten criteria “Open knowledge” takes the concept of open source
and generalizes it beyond computer software. It isthat a license must comply with in order to be
recognized as open source. The major components are: intended to cover copyrighted data (such as music,
books, scientific data, etc.) but not software as this is
? Access to the source code: The lines of code that adequately addressed by open source. It is defined in an
comprise the source code are the instructions run- 11-point definition by the Open Definition [7] as
knowlning the software. If an individual wants to make edge that anyone is “free to use, reuse, and redistribute
changes to a software program, he/she generally – subject only, at most, to the requirement to attribute
needs access to the source code. and share-alike.”
? Free redistribution: An individual may use all or This review focuses solely on open source software
parts of the open source software as a component in development because it is this concept that has become
a larger software application without the require- the model for the other “open” concepts. Being the
oriment of a royalty or a fee. ginal model, it is the oldest, most established and the
? Creation of derived works: Individuals are allowed most studied. Articles regarding open source drug
disto change or expand the open source software and covery are not included in the systematic review but are
distribute the newly created software. included in the Discussion section.
The license defines the formal definition of open Open source software development research themes
source as it relates to the management of the intellectual The existing research on open source software
developproperty (which is typically copyright). However, the ment is varied and plentiful. Major themes of the
concept of open source also conveys a collaborative research include the analysis of developers’ and firms’
approach to innovation. Programmers work together vir- motivations, license choice, successful implementations
tually to develop a software program. They are not and the impact on innovation. Von Krogh et al. [8] have
employed by a single organization. They typically volun- analyzed the existing research on open source software
teer for tasks and come and go