A data-sharing agreement helps to increase researchers’ willingness to share primary data: results from a randomized controlled trial

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 106, Issue , 2019, Pages 60-69

  Polanin, Joshua R ^a   Terzian, Mary ^b  

^a AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH   (United States)

^b Development Services Group Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Data sharing; Individual participant data; Meta analysis; Randomized controlled trial; Research transparency

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; META ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SCIENTIST; AGED; ETHICS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNET; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MIDDLE AGED; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; PERSONNEL; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ADULT; AGED; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; FEMALE; HEALTH RECORDS, PERSONAL; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNET; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 85056245763     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.10.006     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Shamoo, A.E., Resnik, D.B., Responsible conduct of research. 2009, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
2. Polanin, J.R., Williams, R.T., Overcoming obstacles in obtaining individual participant data for meta-analysis. Res Synthesis Methods 7 (2016), 333–341.
3. Lo, B., Sharing clinical trial data: maximizing benefits, minimizing risk. JAMA 313 (2015), 793–794.
4. Ross, J.S., Lehman, R., Gross, C.P., The importance of clinical trial data sharing: toward more open science. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 5 (2012), 238–240.
5. Jaspers, G.J., Degraeuwe, P.L.J., A failed attempt to conduct an individual patient data meta-analysis. Epidemiology 19 (2008), 640–648.
6. Naudet, F., Sakarovitch, C., Janiaud, P., Cristea, I., Fanelli, D., Moher, D., et al. Data sharing and reanalysis of randomized controlled trials in leading biomedical journals with a full data sharing policy: survey of studies published in the BMJ and PLOS Medicine. BMJ, 360, 2018, k400.
7. Polanin, J.R., Efforts to retrieve individual participant datasets for use in a meta-analysis result in moderate data sharing but many datasets remain missing. J Clin Epidemiol 98 (2018), 157–159.
8. Villain, B., Dechartres, A., Boyer, P., Ravaud, P., Feasibility of individual patient data meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery. BMC Med 13 (2015), 1–10.
9. Ahmed, I., Sutton, A.J., Riley, R.D., Assessment of publication bias, selection bias, and unavailable data in meta-analyses using individual participant data: a database survey. BMJ, 344, 2012, d7762.
10. Riley, R.D., Lambert, P.C., Staessen, J.A., Wang, J., Gueyffier, F., Thijs, L., et al. Meta-analysis of continuous outcomes combining individual patient data and aggregate data. Stat Med 27 (2008), 1870–1893.
11. Lambert, P.C., Sutton, A.J., Abrams, K.R., Jones, D.R., A comparison of summary patient-level covariates in meta-regression with individual patient data meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 55 (2002), 86–94.
12. Pigott, T.D., Williams, R.T., Polanin, J.R., Individual participant data meta-analysis with correlations. Res Synth Methods 3 (2012), 257–268.
13. Tudur-Smith, C., Hopkins, C., Sydes, M.R., Woolfall, K., Clarke, M., Murray, G., et al. How should individual participant data (IPD) from publicly funded clinical trials be shared?. BMC Med 13 (2015), 298–306.
14. Campbell, E.G., Clarridge, B.R., Gokhale, M., Birenbaum, L., Hilgartner, S., Holtzman, N.A., et al. Data withholding in academic genetics: evidence from a national survey. JAMA 287 (2002), 473–480.
15. Nevitt, S.J., Marson, A.G., Davie, B., Reynolds, S., Williams, L., Smith, C.T., Exploring changes over time and characteristics associated with data retrieval across individual participant data meta-analyses: systematic review. BMJ, 357, 2017, J1390.
16. Gelman, A., Hill, J., Su, Y., Yajima, M., Pittau, M., Goodrich, B., et al. Missing Data Imputation and Model Checking (Version 1.0) [Software]. 2015 Available at https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mi/mi.pdf. (Accessed 1 June 2017)
17. Revelle, W., Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research (Version 1.7.3.21) [Software]. 2017 Available at https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/psych/psych.pdf. (Accessed 1 June 2017)
18. Revelle, W., Rocklin, T., Very simple structure: an alternative procedure for estimating the optimal number of interpretable factors. Multivariate Behav Res 14:4 (1979), 403–414.
19. Velicer, W., Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika 41:3 (1976), 321–327.
20. Polanin, J.R., Snilstveit, B., Campbell methods policy note on converting between effect sizes (Version 1.1, updated December 2016). 2016, The Campbell Collaboration, Oslo.
21. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 3.4.2) [Software]. 2018 Available at http://www.R-project.org/. (Accessed 1 June 2017)
22. Wickham, H., Francois, R., A Grammar of Data Manipulation (Version 0.5.0) [Software]. 2016 Available at https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/dplyr/dplyr.pdf. (Accessed 1 June 2017)
23. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, What Works Clearinghouse. What WorksClearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 3.0). 2014 Available at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/documentsum.aspx?sid=19. (Accessed 1 June 2017)