1
|
Hamilton DG, Hong K, Fraser H, Rowhani-Farid A, Fidler F, Page MJ. Prevalence and predictors of data and code sharing in the medical and health sciences: systematic review with meta-analysis of individual participant data. BMJ 2023; 382:e075767. [PMID: 37433624 DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2023-075767] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/13/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To synthesise research investigating data and code sharing in medicine and health to establish an accurate representation of the prevalence of sharing, how this frequency has changed over time, and what factors influence availability. DESIGN Systematic review with meta-analysis of individual participant data. DATA SOURCES Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, and the preprint servers medRxiv, bioRxiv, and MetaArXiv were searched from inception to 1 July 2021. Forward citation searches were also performed on 30 August 2022. REVIEW METHODS Meta-research studies that investigated data or code sharing across a sample of scientific articles presenting original medical and health research were identified. Two authors screened records, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted summary data from study reports when individual participant data could not be retrieved. Key outcomes of interest were the prevalence of statements that declared that data or code were publicly or privately available (declared availability) and the success rates of retrieving these products (actual availability). The associations between data and code availability and several factors (eg, journal policy, type of data, trial design, and human participants) were also examined. A two stage approach to meta-analysis of individual participant data was performed, with proportions and risk ratios pooled with the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS The review included 105 meta-research studies examining 2 121 580 articles across 31 specialties. Eligible studies examined a median of 195 primary articles (interquartile range 113-475), with a median publication year of 2015 (interquartile range 2012-2018). Only eight studies (8%) were classified as having a low risk of bias. Meta-analyses showed a prevalence of declared and actual public data availability of 8% (95% confidence interval 5% to 11%) and 2% (1% to 3%), respectively, between 2016 and 2021. For public code sharing, both the prevalence of declared and actual availability were estimated to be <0.5% since 2016. Meta-regressions indicated that only declared public data sharing prevalence estimates have increased over time. Compliance with mandatory data sharing policies ranged from 0% to 100% across journals and varied by type of data. In contrast, success in privately obtaining data and code from authors historically ranged between 0% and 37% and 0% and 23%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The review found that public code sharing was persistently low across medical research. Declarations of data sharing were also low, increasing over time, but did not always correspond to actual sharing of data. The effectiveness of mandatory data sharing policies varied substantially by journal and type of data, a finding that might be informative for policy makers when designing policies and allocating resources to audit compliance. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION Open Science Framework doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/7SX8U.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel G Hamilton
- MetaMelb Research Group, School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Melbourne Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry, and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Kyungwan Hong
- Department of Practice, Sciences, and Health Outcomes Research, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Hannah Fraser
- MetaMelb Research Group, School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Anisa Rowhani-Farid
- Department of Practice, Sciences, and Health Outcomes Research, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Fiona Fidler
- MetaMelb Research Group, School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Matthew J Page
- Methods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
DiTosto JD, Steinberg JR, Turner BE, Weeks BT, Young AMP, Lu CF, Wolgemuth T, Holder K, Laasiri N, Squires NA, Anderson JN, Zhang N, Richardson MT, Magnani CJ, Perry MF, Yee LM. How many US obstetrical trials reach publication? A cross-sectional analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed from 2007 to 2019. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022; 4:100696. [PMID: 35872356 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2022.100696] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2022] [Revised: 07/14/2022] [Accepted: 07/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Obstetrical clinical trials are the foundation of evidence-based medicine during pregnancy. As more obstetrical trials are conducted, understanding the publication characteristics of these trials is of utmost importance to advance obstetrical health. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to characterize the frequency of publication and trial characteristics associated with publication among obstetrical clinical trials in the United States. We additionally sought to examine time from trial completion to publication. STUDY DESIGN This was a cross-sectional analysis of completed obstetrical trials with an intervention design and at least 1 site in the United States registered to ClinicalTrials.gov from 2007 to 2019. Trial characteristics were cross-referenced with PubMed to determine publication status up to 2021 using the National Clinical Trial identification number. Bivariable analyses were conducted to determine trial characteristics associated with publication. Multivariable logistic regression models controlling for prespecified covariates were generated to estimate the relationship between funding, primary purpose, and therapeutic foci with publication. Additional exploratory analyses of other trial characteristics were conducted. Time to publication was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models. RESULTS Of the 1879 obstetrical trials with registered completion, a total of 575 (30.6%) had at least 1 site in the United States, were completed before October 1, 2019, and were included in this analysis. Between October 2007 and October 2019, fewer than two-thirds (N=348, 60.5%) of trials reached publication. Annual rates of publication ranged from 46.4% in 2018 to 70.0% in 2007. No difference was observed in publication by funding, primary purpose, or therapeutic foci (all P>.05). Trials with characteristics indicating high trial quality-including randomized allocation scheme, ≥50 participants enrolled, ≥2 sites, and presence of a data safety monitoring committee-had increased odds of publication compared with those without such characteristics (all P<.05). For example, studies with randomized allocation of intervention had 2-fold greater odds of publication than nonrandomized studies (adjusted odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-3.37). Studies with ≥150 participants had nearly 8-fold odds of publication (adjusted odds ratio, 7.90; 95% confidence interval, 3.78-17.49) relative to studies with <50 participants. Temporal analysis demonstrated variability in time to publication among obstetrical trials, with a median time of 20.1 months after trial completion, and with most trials that reached publication having been published by 40 months. No difference was observed in time to publication by funding, primary purpose, or therapeutic foci (all P>.05). CONCLUSION Publication of obstetrical trials remains suboptimal, with significant differences observed between trials with indicators of high quality and those without. Most trials that reach publication are published within 2 years of registered completion on ClinicalTrials.gov.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia D DiTosto
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL (Ms DiTosto, Drs Steinberg, Young, Lu, and Wolgemuth, Ms Holder, and Drs Squires, Perry, and Yee)
| | - Jecca R Steinberg
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL (Ms DiTosto, Drs Steinberg, Young, Lu, and Wolgemuth, Ms Holder, and Drs Squires, Perry, and Yee)
| | - Brandon E Turner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Dr Turner)
| | - Brannon T Weeks
- Integrated Residency Program in Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brigham and Women's Hospital-Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Dr Weeks)
| | - Anna Marie P Young
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL (Ms DiTosto, Drs Steinberg, Young, Lu, and Wolgemuth, Ms Holder, and Drs Squires, Perry, and Yee)
| | - Connie F Lu
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL (Ms DiTosto, Drs Steinberg, Young, Lu, and Wolgemuth, Ms Holder, and Drs Squires, Perry, and Yee)
| | - Tierney Wolgemuth
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL (Ms DiTosto, Drs Steinberg, Young, Lu, and Wolgemuth, Ms Holder, and Drs Squires, Perry, and Yee)
| | - Kai Holder
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL (Ms DiTosto, Drs Steinberg, Young, Lu, and Wolgemuth, Ms Holder, and Drs Squires, Perry, and Yee)
| | - Nora Laasiri
- Northwestern University Physician Assistant Program, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL (Ms Laasiri)
| | - Natalie A Squires
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL (Ms DiTosto, Drs Steinberg, Young, Lu, and Wolgemuth, Ms Holder, and Drs Squires, Perry, and Yee)
| | - Jill N Anderson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA (Dr Anderson)
| | - Naixin Zhang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN (Dr Zhang)
| | - Michael T Richardson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA (Dr Richardson)
| | - Christopher J Magnani
- Division of Urological Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (Dr Magnani)
| | - Madeline F Perry
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL (Ms DiTosto, Drs Steinberg, Young, Lu, and Wolgemuth, Ms Holder, and Drs Squires, Perry, and Yee)
| | - Lynn M Yee
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL (Ms DiTosto, Drs Steinberg, Young, Lu, and Wolgemuth, Ms Holder, and Drs Squires, Perry, and Yee).
| |
Collapse
|