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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Trace, Samantha, Bracher, Mike, Kolstoe, Simon E
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