  Since a number of journals specifically focus on the review and publication
of data sets, reviewing their policies seems an appropriate place to start in
assessing what existing practice looks like in the 'real world' of reviewing
and publishing data. This article outlines a study of the publicly available
peer review policies of 39 scientific publications that publish data papers to
discern which criteria are most and least frequently referenced. It also
compares current practice with proposed criteria published in 2012.
