Objective
To quantify data sharing policy compliance at the BMJ by analysing the rate of data sharing practices, and investigate attitudes and examine barriers towards data sharing.
Design
Observational study.
Setting
The BMJ research archive.
Participants
160 randomly sampled BMJ research articles, excluding meta-analysis and systematic reviews.
Main outcome measures
Percentages of research articles that indicated the availability of their raw datasets in their data sharing statements and those that provided their datasets upon request.
Results
Fifty out of 160 (31%) research articles indicated the availability of their datasets. Twelve used publicly available data and the remaining 38 were sent email requests to access their datasets. Only 1 publicly available dataset could be accessed and only 6 out of 38 shared their data via e-mail. So only 7/160 research articles shared their datasets, 4.4% (95% confidence interval: 1.8% to 8.8%).
Conclusions
Despite the BMJ’s strong data sharing policy, sharing rates are low. Possible explanations for low data sharing rates could be: the wording of the BMJ data sharing policy, which leaves room for individual interpretation and possible loopholes; that our email requests ended up in researchers spam folders; and, that researchers are not rewarded in the scientific community for sharing their data. It might be time for a more effective data sharing policy and better incentives for health and medical researchers to share their data.
↧