222
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Empirical Study of Data Sharing by Authors Publishing in PLoS Journals

      research-article
      , *
      PLoS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Many journals now require authors share their data with other investigators, either by depositing the data in a public repository or making it freely available upon request. These policies are explicit, but remain largely untested. We sought to determine how well authors comply with such policies by requesting data from authors who had published in one of two journals with clear data sharing policies.

          Methods and Findings

          We requested data from ten investigators who had published in either PLoS Medicine or PLoS Clinical Trials. All responses were carefully documented. In the event that we were refused data, we reminded authors of the journal's data sharing guidelines. If we did not receive a response to our initial request, a second request was made. Following the ten requests for raw data, three investigators did not respond, four authors responded and refused to share their data, two email addresses were no longer valid, and one author requested further details. A reminder of PLoS's explicit requirement that authors share data did not change the reply from the four authors who initially refused. Only one author sent an original data set.

          Conclusions

          We received only one of ten raw data sets requested. This suggests that journal policies requiring data sharing do not lead to authors making their data sets available to independent investigators.

          Related collections

          Most cited references2

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The poor availability of psychological research data for reanalysis.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Whose data set is it anyway? Sharing raw data from randomized trials

            Background Sharing of raw research data is common in many areas of medical research, genomics being perhaps the most well-known example. In the clinical trial community investigators routinely refuse to share raw data from a randomized trial without giving a reason. Discussion Data sharing benefits numerous research-related activities: reproducing analyses; testing secondary hypotheses; developing and evaluating novel statistical methods; teaching; aiding design of future trials; meta-analysis; and, possibly, preventing error, fraud and selective reporting. Clinical trialists, however, sometimes appear overly concerned with being scooped and with misrepresentation of their work. Both possibilities can be avoided with simple measures such as inclusion of the original trialists as co-authors on any publication resulting from data sharing. Moreover, if we treat any data set as belonging to the patients who comprise it, rather than the investigators, such concerns fall away. Conclusion Technological developments, particularly the Internet, have made data sharing generally a trivial logistical problem. Data sharing should come to be seen as an inherent part of conducting a randomized trial, similar to the way in which we consider ethical review and publication of study results. Journals and funding bodies should insist that trialists make raw data available, for example, by publishing data on the Web. If the clinical trial community continues to fail with respect to data sharing, we will only strengthen the public perception that we do clinical trials to benefit ourselves, not our patients.
              Bookmark

              Author and article information

              Contributors
              Role: Editor
              Journal
              PLoS One
              plos
              plosone
              PLoS ONE
              Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
              1932-6203
              2009
              18 September 2009
              : 4
              : 9
              : e7078
              Affiliations
              [1]Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America
              The Cochrane Collaboration, Germany
              Author notes

              Conceived and designed the experiments: CS AV. Performed the experiments: CS. Analyzed the data: CS AV. Wrote the paper: CS AV.

              Article
              09-PONE-RA-10231R2
              10.1371/journal.pone.0007078
              2739314
              19763261
              c83cf6cc-460a-4c69-968a-c3ba44484241
              Savage, Vickers. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
              History
              : 8 May 2009
              : 5 August 2009
              Page count
              Pages: 3
              Categories
              Research Article
              Science Policy
              Non-Clinical Medicine/Medical Journals
              Non-Clinical Medicine/Research Methods

              Uncategorized
              Uncategorized

              Comments

              Comment on this article