|Publisher||Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory|
Background: The Annals of Internal Medicine (AIM) has adopted a policy encouraging data-sharing since 2007.
Objective: To explore the impact of the AIM data-sharing policy for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in terms of output from data-sharing (i.e. publications re-using the data).
Design: Retrospective study.
Participants: RCTs published in the AIM between 2007 and 2017 were retrieved on PubMed. Publications where the data had been re-used were identified on Web of Science. Searches were performed by two independent reviewers.
Interventions: Intention to share data (or not) expressed in a data-sharing statement.
Measurements: The primary outcome was any published re-use of the data (i.e. re-analysis, secondary analysis, or meta-analysis of individual participant data [MIPD]), where the first, last and corresponding authors were not among the authors of the RCT. Components of the primary outcome and analyses without any author restriction were secondary outcomes. Analyses used Cox (primary analysis) models adjusting for RCT characteristics.
Results: 185 RCTs were identified. 106 (57%) mentioned willingness to share data and 79 (43%) did not. 208 secondary analyses, 67 MIPD and no re-analyses were identified. No significant association was found between intent to share and re-use where the first, last and corresponding authors were not among the authors of the primary RCT (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.04 [0.47-2.30]). Secondary outcomes also showed no association between intent to share and re-use.
Limitations: Possibility of residual confounding and limited power.
Conclusion: Over ten years, RCTs published in AIM expressing an intention to share data were not associated with more extensive re-use of the data.
Funding Source: Grants from the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale, Région Bretagne, and French National Research Agency.
Known Files and URLs
|application/pdf 481.6 kB ||
grouping other versions (eg, pre-print) and variants of this release