ArticleTrials2013
Sharing individual level data from observational studies and clinical trials: a perspective from NHLBI.
Article in Trials, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Best Practices for Ethical Sharing of Individual-Level Health Research Data From Low- and Middle-Income Settings.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2015Pooled it
- Effects of an early restrictive versus liberal fluid strategy on long-term patient-centered outcomes in sepsis-induced hypotension: an open-label, randomized controlled trial.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2026Trial
- Review
- Stakeholder perspectives on data sharing from pragmatic clinical trials: Unanticipated challenges for meeting emerging requirements.Learning health systems · 2024Article
- Clinical trial data sharing: a cross-sectional study of outcomes associated with two U.S. National Institutes of Health models.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Ethics challenges in sharing data from pragmatic clinical trials.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2022Article
- Learning from electronic health records across multiple sites: A communication-efficient and privacy-preserving distributed algorithm.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Article
- Individual Patient-Level Data Sharing for Continuous Learning: A Strategy for Trial Data Sharing.NAM perspectives · 2019Review
- Overview and experience of the YODA Project with clinical trial data sharing after 5 years.Scientific data · 2018Article
- Clinical Trial Participants' Views of the Risks and Benefits of Data Sharing.The New England journal of medicine · 2018Article
- A Pragmatic Approach for Reproducible Research With Sensitive Data.American journal of epidemiology · 2017Article
- Data sharing: A new editorial initiative of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Implications for the editors' network.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2017Article
- Use of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Data Repository.The New England journal of medicine · 2017Article
- Data Sharing: a New Editorial Initiative from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Implications for the Editors' Network.Korean circulation journal · 2017Review
- Data sharing: A new editorial initiative of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors : Implications for the Editors' Network.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2017Article
- Data Sharing: A New Editorial Initiative of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Implications for the Editors´ Network.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2017Article
- Data Sharing: A New Editorial Initiative of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Implications for the Editors' Network.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2017Article
- Big and disparate data: considerations for pediatric consortia.Current opinion in pediatrics · 2017Review
- Data sharing through an NIH central database repository: a cross-sectional survey of BioLINCC users.BMJ open · 2016Article
- Sharing raw data from clinical trials: what progress since we first asked "Whose data set is it anyway?".Trials · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are numerous benefits to the research community from data sharing, and yet the open sharing of participant level data is not without potential pitfalls. In addition to the scientific community, the interests of study participants who volunteered their data must be considered, along with the interests of study investigators who expend a substantial amount of effort into the design, conduct, and analytical plans for the study. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) has developed a data-sharing protocol focused on balancing the interests of study participants, study investigators, and the research community with independent oversight by the NHLBI IRB. The data repository presently includes individual level data on more than 560,000 participants from 100 Institute-supported clinical trials and observational studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.