Cargando…

Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES: To explore the impact of data-sharing initiatives on the intent to share data, on actual data sharing, on the use of shared data and on research output and impact of shared data. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All studies investigating data-sharing practices for individual participant data (IPD)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ohmann, Christian, Moher, David, Siebert, Maximilian, Motschall, Edith, Naudet, Florian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8375721/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34408052
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049228
_version_ 1783740354127724544
author Ohmann, Christian
Moher, David
Siebert, Maximilian
Motschall, Edith
Naudet, Florian
author_facet Ohmann, Christian
Moher, David
Siebert, Maximilian
Motschall, Edith
Naudet, Florian
author_sort Ohmann, Christian
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To explore the impact of data-sharing initiatives on the intent to share data, on actual data sharing, on the use of shared data and on research output and impact of shared data. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All studies investigating data-sharing practices for individual participant data (IPD) from clinical trials. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: We searched the Medline database, the Cochrane Library, the Science Citation Index Expanded and the Social Sciences Citation Index via Web of Science, and preprints and proceedings of the International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication. In addition, we inspected major clinical trial data-sharing platforms, contacted major journals/publishers, editorial groups and some funders. CHARTING METHODS: Two reviewers independently extracted information on methods and results from resources identified using a standardised questionnaire. A map of the extracted data was constructed and accompanied by a narrative summary for each outcome domain. RESULTS: 93 studies identified in the literature search (published between 2001 and 2020, median: 2018) and 5 from additional information sources were included in the scoping review. Most studies were descriptive and focused on early phases of the data-sharing process. While the willingness to share IPD from clinical trials is extremely high, actual data-sharing rates are suboptimal. A survey of journal data suggests poor to moderate enforcement of the policies by publishers. Metrics provided by platforms suggest that a large majority of data remains unrequested. When requested, the purpose of the reuse is more often secondary analyses and meta-analyses, rarely re-analyses. Finally, studies focused on the real impact of data-sharing were rare and used surrogates such as citation metrics. CONCLUSIONS: There is currently a gap in the evidence base for the impact of IPD sharing, which entails uncertainties in the implementation of current data-sharing policies. High level evidence is needed to assess whether the value of medical research increases with data-sharing practices.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8375721
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83757212021-09-02 Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review Ohmann, Christian Moher, David Siebert, Maximilian Motschall, Edith Naudet, Florian BMJ Open Health Informatics OBJECTIVES: To explore the impact of data-sharing initiatives on the intent to share data, on actual data sharing, on the use of shared data and on research output and impact of shared data. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All studies investigating data-sharing practices for individual participant data (IPD) from clinical trials. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: We searched the Medline database, the Cochrane Library, the Science Citation Index Expanded and the Social Sciences Citation Index via Web of Science, and preprints and proceedings of the International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication. In addition, we inspected major clinical trial data-sharing platforms, contacted major journals/publishers, editorial groups and some funders. CHARTING METHODS: Two reviewers independently extracted information on methods and results from resources identified using a standardised questionnaire. A map of the extracted data was constructed and accompanied by a narrative summary for each outcome domain. RESULTS: 93 studies identified in the literature search (published between 2001 and 2020, median: 2018) and 5 from additional information sources were included in the scoping review. Most studies were descriptive and focused on early phases of the data-sharing process. While the willingness to share IPD from clinical trials is extremely high, actual data-sharing rates are suboptimal. A survey of journal data suggests poor to moderate enforcement of the policies by publishers. Metrics provided by platforms suggest that a large majority of data remains unrequested. When requested, the purpose of the reuse is more often secondary analyses and meta-analyses, rarely re-analyses. Finally, studies focused on the real impact of data-sharing were rare and used surrogates such as citation metrics. CONCLUSIONS: There is currently a gap in the evidence base for the impact of IPD sharing, which entails uncertainties in the implementation of current data-sharing policies. High level evidence is needed to assess whether the value of medical research increases with data-sharing practices. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-08-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8375721/ /pubmed/34408052 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049228 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Health Informatics
Ohmann, Christian
Moher, David
Siebert, Maximilian
Motschall, Edith
Naudet, Florian
Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review
title Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review
title_full Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review
title_fullStr Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review
title_short Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review
title_sort status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review
topic Health Informatics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8375721/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34408052
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049228
work_keys_str_mv AT ohmannchristian statususeandimpactofsharingindividualparticipantdatafromclinicaltrialsascopingreview
AT moherdavid statususeandimpactofsharingindividualparticipantdatafromclinicaltrialsascopingreview
AT siebertmaximilian statususeandimpactofsharingindividualparticipantdatafromclinicaltrialsascopingreview
AT motschalledith statususeandimpactofsharingindividualparticipantdatafromclinicaltrialsascopingreview
AT naudetflorian statususeandimpactofsharingindividualparticipantdatafromclinicaltrialsascopingreview