数据共享声明：跨临床研究学科期刊政策的影响

IF 37.6 1区医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS

European Heart Journal Pub Date : 2025-05-30 DOI:10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf359

Daniel Archer, Noah Barks, Mahad Chaudhry, Brody Dennis, Jacob Duncan, Annes Elfar, Taylor Gardner, Eli Paul, Micah Kee, Alicia Ito Ford, Matt Vassar

{"title":"数据共享声明：跨临床研究学科期刊政策的影响","authors":"Daniel Archer, Noah Barks, Mahad Chaudhry, Brody Dennis, Jacob Duncan, Annes Elfar, Taylor Gardner, Eli Paul, Micah Kee, Alicia Ito Ford, Matt Vassar","doi":"10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Aims Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of mortality, with significant investments in research to improve treatment and prevention. Data sharing enhances transparency, reproducibility, and collaboration, yet data sharing statement (DSS) inclusion remains inconsistent. This study evaluates DSS prevalence, content, and influencing factors in high-impact cardiology journals, examines journal policy influence, and assesses data sharing feasibility by contacting authors who indicated data availability. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was conducted to assess DSS inclusion in top cardiology, selected general medicine, emergency medicine, and orthopaedic surgery journals. A systematic PubMed search identified clinical studies published from 2020 to 2023. Logistic regression models assessed factors associated with DSS inclusion, while thematic analysis categorized DSS content. Corresponding authors who indicated data availability upon request were contacted to evaluate follow-through. Results Among 2941 articles, 1004 (34.14%) included a DSS. Data sharing statement prevalence varied by discipline: cardiology (52%), general medicine (96%), emergency medicine (12%), and orthopedic surgery (14%). Policy enforcement drove DSS inclusion, with post-policy articles significantly more likely to contain a DSS. Funding status, study design, article access, and impact factor also influenced DSS presence. Thematic analysis identified conditional availability and gatekeeping as dominant DSS themes. Of authors who stated data were available upon request, only 31% ultimately provided access. Conclusions Data sharing statement inclusion in cardiology research remains inconsistent, with journal policies playing a key role in increasing prevalence. However, real-world data-sharing practices often fall short of stated commitments. Addressing logistical and financial barriers will be essential to improving data availability in cardiology research.","PeriodicalId":11976,"journal":{"name":"European Heart Journal","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":37.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Data sharing statements: impact of journal policies across clinical research disciplines\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Archer, Noah Barks, Mahad Chaudhry, Brody Dennis, Jacob Duncan, Annes Elfar, Taylor Gardner, Eli Paul, Micah Kee, Alicia Ito Ford, Matt Vassar\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf359\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background and Aims Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of mortality, with significant investments in research to improve treatment and prevention. Data sharing enhances transparency, reproducibility, and collaboration, yet data sharing statement (DSS) inclusion remains inconsistent. This study evaluates DSS prevalence, content, and influencing factors in high-impact cardiology journals, examines journal policy influence, and assesses data sharing feasibility by contacting authors who indicated data availability. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was conducted to assess DSS inclusion in top cardiology, selected general medicine, emergency medicine, and orthopaedic surgery journals. A systematic PubMed search identified clinical studies published from 2020 to 2023. Logistic regression models assessed factors associated with DSS inclusion, while thematic analysis categorized DSS content. Corresponding authors who indicated data availability upon request were contacted to evaluate follow-through. Results Among 2941 articles, 1004 (34.14%) included a DSS. Data sharing statement prevalence varied by discipline: cardiology (52%), general medicine (96%), emergency medicine (12%), and orthopedic surgery (14%). Policy enforcement drove DSS inclusion, with post-policy articles significantly more likely to contain a DSS. Funding status, study design, article access, and impact factor also influenced DSS presence. Thematic analysis identified conditional availability and gatekeeping as dominant DSS themes. Of authors who stated data were available upon request, only 31% ultimately provided access. Conclusions Data sharing statement inclusion in cardiology research remains inconsistent, with journal policies playing a key role in increasing prevalence. However, real-world data-sharing practices often fall short of stated commitments. Addressing logistical and financial barriers will be essential to improving data availability in cardiology research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11976,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Heart Journal\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":37.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Heart Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf359\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Heart Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf359","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的心血管疾病是导致死亡的主要原因，在改善治疗和预防研究方面投入了大量资金。数据共享增强了透明度、可重复性和协作性，但数据共享声明（DSS）的包含仍然不一致。本研究评估了高影响力心脏病学期刊中DSS的患病率、内容和影响因素，检查了期刊政策的影响，并通过联系指出数据可用性的作者来评估数据共享的可行性。方法采用横断面分析评估DSS在顶级心脏病学、精选普通医学、急诊医学和骨科外科期刊中的纳入情况。PubMed系统检索确定了2020年至2023年发表的临床研究。逻辑回归模型评估了与DSS纳入相关的因素，而主题分析对DSS内容进行了分类。联系了应要求提供数据的通讯作者，以评估后续工作。结果2941篇文献中包含DSS 1004篇（34.14%）。数据共享声明的患病率因学科而异：心脏病学（52%）、普通医学（96%）、急诊医学（12%）和骨科（14%）。政策执行推动了DSS的包含，政策后的文章更有可能包含DSS。资助状况、研究设计、文章获取和影响因子也影响决策支持系统的存在。专题分析确定了条件可用性和把关是决策支持系统的主要主题。在声称数据可根据要求提供的作者中，只有31%最终提供了访问权限。结论：心脏病学研究中数据共享声明的纳入仍然不一致，期刊政策在患病率的增加中起着关键作用。然而，现实世界的数据共享实践往往达不到声明的承诺。解决后勤和财政障碍对于改善心脏病学研究的数据可用性至关重要。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Data sharing statements: impact of journal policies across clinical research disciplines

Background and Aims Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of mortality, with significant investments in research to improve treatment and prevention. Data sharing enhances transparency, reproducibility, and collaboration, yet data sharing statement (DSS) inclusion remains inconsistent. This study evaluates DSS prevalence, content, and influencing factors in high-impact cardiology journals, examines journal policy influence, and assesses data sharing feasibility by contacting authors who indicated data availability. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was conducted to assess DSS inclusion in top cardiology, selected general medicine, emergency medicine, and orthopaedic surgery journals. A systematic PubMed search identified clinical studies published from 2020 to 2023. Logistic regression models assessed factors associated with DSS inclusion, while thematic analysis categorized DSS content. Corresponding authors who indicated data availability upon request were contacted to evaluate follow-through. Results Among 2941 articles, 1004 (34.14%) included a DSS. Data sharing statement prevalence varied by discipline: cardiology (52%), general medicine (96%), emergency medicine (12%), and orthopedic surgery (14%). Policy enforcement drove DSS inclusion, with post-policy articles significantly more likely to contain a DSS. Funding status, study design, article access, and impact factor also influenced DSS presence. Thematic analysis identified conditional availability and gatekeeping as dominant DSS themes. Of authors who stated data were available upon request, only 31% ultimately provided access. Conclusions Data sharing statement inclusion in cardiology research remains inconsistent, with journal policies playing a key role in increasing prevalence. However, real-world data-sharing practices often fall short of stated commitments. Addressing logistical and financial barriers will be essential to improving data availability in cardiology research.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

European Heart Journal 医学-心血管系统

CiteScore

39.30

自引率

6.90%

发文量

3942

审稿时长

1 months

期刊介绍： The European Heart Journal is a renowned international journal that focuses on cardiovascular medicine. It is published weekly and is the official journal of the European Society of Cardiology. This peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing high-quality clinical and scientific material pertaining to all aspects of cardiovascular medicine. It covers a diverse range of topics including research findings, technical evaluations, and reviews. Moreover, the journal serves as a platform for the exchange of information and discussions on various aspects of cardiovascular medicine, including educational matters. In addition to original papers on cardiovascular medicine and surgery, the European Heart Journal also presents reviews, clinical perspectives, ESC Guidelines, and editorial articles that highlight recent advancements in cardiology. Additionally, the journal actively encourages readers to share their thoughts and opinions through correspondence.