[d110af5ccf]

I agree that they should ideally come with raw data along with all code that was used to process it to produce the results as presented.

> but contributes none because I’m an amateur

I don't mean to be rude but it seems relevant to point out. Papers aren't written for the benefit of amateurs. They're written for experts who actively work in that specific field. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

[jiggunjer]

It's not common for ethics boards to permit patient scans to become public domain, even when anonymized.

[rtkaratekid]

Yeah I agree, but I read papers mainly in domains I do have university level degrees in. So while I’m not as expert as a lifetime professor, I do know the fields relatively well.

And I don’t think it’s rude, that’s why I included that statement!