Cargando…
Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees
OBJECTIVE: To determine data sharing and number of publications coming from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committees (RECs). DESIGN: Cohort study. INCLUSION CRITERIA & SETTING: All research databases listed on the...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7528358/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32998929 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039756 |
_version_ | 1783589247226216448 |
---|---|
author | Trace, Samantha Bracher, Mike Kolstoe, Simon E |
author_facet | Trace, Samantha Bracher, Mike Kolstoe, Simon E |
author_sort | Trace, Samantha |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To determine data sharing and number of publications coming from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committees (RECs). DESIGN: Cohort study. INCLUSION CRITERIA & SETTING: All research databases listed on the UK Health Research Authority’s Assessment Review Portal (HARP) that had received a favourable ethics opinion as of January 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Publications and data access requests are either listed on HARP or notified through subsequent email correspondence. RESULTS: Out of 354 eligible databases, 34% had granted access requests and 40% had produced at least one peer-reviewed paper or conference abstract/talk. We could not establish contact with 9% of databases, and 19% reported no access requests or publications. Only 9% of databases were up to date with all annual reports. Email responses from database owners showed a range of attitudes towards data sharing. CONCLUSION: Less than half of research databases that have received a favourable opinion from NHS research ethics committees share their data and produce publications. There is also considerable variability in the operation of research databases and understanding of the purpose of research databases. This work was hampered by incomplete records due mainly to researchers not submitting annual reports. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7528358 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75283582020-10-19 Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees Trace, Samantha Bracher, Mike Kolstoe, Simon E BMJ Open Ethics OBJECTIVE: To determine data sharing and number of publications coming from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committees (RECs). DESIGN: Cohort study. INCLUSION CRITERIA & SETTING: All research databases listed on the UK Health Research Authority’s Assessment Review Portal (HARP) that had received a favourable ethics opinion as of January 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Publications and data access requests are either listed on HARP or notified through subsequent email correspondence. RESULTS: Out of 354 eligible databases, 34% had granted access requests and 40% had produced at least one peer-reviewed paper or conference abstract/talk. We could not establish contact with 9% of databases, and 19% reported no access requests or publications. Only 9% of databases were up to date with all annual reports. Email responses from database owners showed a range of attitudes towards data sharing. CONCLUSION: Less than half of research databases that have received a favourable opinion from NHS research ethics committees share their data and produce publications. There is also considerable variability in the operation of research databases and understanding of the purpose of research databases. This work was hampered by incomplete records due mainly to researchers not submitting annual reports. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7528358/ /pubmed/32998929 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039756 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Ethics Trace, Samantha Bracher, Mike Kolstoe, Simon E Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
title | Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
title_full | Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
title_fullStr | Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
title_full_unstemmed | Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
title_short | Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
title_sort | determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by uk research ethics committees |
topic | Ethics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7528358/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32998929 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039756 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tracesamantha determiningthelevelofdatasharingandnumberofpublicationsfromresearchdatabasesthathavebeengivenafavourableopinionbyukresearchethicscommittees AT brachermike determiningthelevelofdatasharingandnumberofpublicationsfromresearchdatabasesthathavebeengivenafavourableopinionbyukresearchethicscommittees AT kolstoesimone determiningthelevelofdatasharingandnumberofpublicationsfromresearchdatabasesthathavebeengivenafavourableopinionbyukresearchethicscommittees |