Systematic reviewers' perspectives on sharing review data, analytic code, and other materials: A survey

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorNguyen, P.
dc.contributor.authorMcKenzie, J.E.
dc.contributor.authorHamilton, D.G.
dc.contributor.authorMoher, D.
dc.contributor.authorTugwell, P.
dc.contributor.authorFidler, F.M.
dc.contributor.authorHaddaway, N.R.
dc.contributor.authorHiggins, J.P.T.
dc.contributor.authorKanukula, R.
dc.contributor.authorKarunananthan, S.
dc.contributor.authorMaxwell, L.J.
dc.contributor.authorMcDonald, S.
dc.contributor.authorNakagawa, S.
dc.contributor.authorNunan, D.
dc.contributor.authorWelch, V.A.
dc.contributor.authorPage, M.J.
dc.date.issued2023
dc.description.abstractBackground There are many benefits of sharing data, analytic code, and other materials, yet these items are infrequently shared among systematic reviews (SRs). It is unclear which factors influence authors' decisions to share data, code, or materials when publishing their SRs. Therefore, we aimed to explore systematic reviewers' perspectives on the importance of sharing review materials and factors that might influence such practices. Methods We searched PubMed for SRs published from January to April 2021, from which we randomly allocated 50% to this survey and 50% to another survey on the replication of SRs. We sent an electronic survey to authors of these SRs (n = 4671) using Qualtrics. Quantitative responses were summarized using frequency analysis. Free-text answers were coded using an inductive approach. Results The response rate was 9% (n = 417). Most participants supported routine sharing of search strategies (84%) but fewer for analytic code (43%) or files documenting data preparation (38%). Most participants agreed that normative practices within the discipline were an important facilitator (78%). Major perceived barriers were lack of time (62%) and suitable sharing platforms (31%). Few participants were required by funders (19%) or institutions (17%) to share data, and only 12% of participants reported receiving training on data sharing. Commonly perceived consequences of data sharing were lost opportunities for future publications (50%), misuse of data (48%), and issues with intellectual property (40%). In their most recent reviews, participants who did not share data cited the lack of journal requirements (56%) or noted the review did not include any statistical analysis that required sharing (29%). Conclusion Certain types of review materials were considered unnecessary for sharing, despite their importance to the review's transparency and reproducibility. Structural barriers and concerns about negative consequences hinder data sharing among systematic reviewers. Normalization and institutional incentives are essential to promote data-sharing practices in evidence-synthesis research.
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityPhi-Yen Nguyen, Joanne E. McKenzie, Daniel G. Hamilton, David Moher, Peter Tugwell, Fiona M. Fidler, Neal R. Haddaway, Julian P. T. Higgins, Raju Kanukula, Sathya Karunananthan, Lara J. Maxwell, Steve McDonald, Shinichi Nakagawa, David Nunan, Vivian A. Welch, Matthew J. Page
dc.identifier.citationCochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods, 2023; 1(2):e12008-1-e12008-15
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/cesm.12008
dc.identifier.issn2832-9023
dc.identifier.issn2832-9023
dc.identifier.orcidKanukula, R. [0000-0003-0793-786X]
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2440/148435
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWiley
dc.relation.granthttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/DE200101618
dc.relation.granthttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/GNT2009612
dc.relation.granthttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/FT150100297
dc.rights© 2023 The Authors. Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Cochrane Collaboration. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
dc.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.1002/cesm.12008
dc.subjectdata sharing; systematic reviews; barriers and facilitators; transparency & reproducibility
dc.titleSystematic reviewers' perspectives on sharing review data, analytic code, and other materials: A survey
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.publication-statusPublished

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
hdl_148435.pdf
Size:
1.67 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Published version
Download

Collections

Research Outputs