ArticlePeerJ2013
Data reuse and the open data citation advantage.
Article in PeerJ, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 137 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
137 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Orthology-Aware Reanalysis of Replicated Public Transcriptomes Identifies Shared and Context-Dependent Low-Temperature Responses in Teleost Fishes.Marine biotechnology (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- The Common Fund Data Ecosystem (CFDE).bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- AI for scientific discovery is a social problem.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Review
- Insights and priorities from the 2025 private funders' Parkinson's disease and related disorders large footprint data interoperability summit.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2026Article
- Collective action for responsible global health data sharing and use.BMJ global health · 2026Review
- Enhanced semantic classification of microbiome sample origins using large language models (LLMs).GigaScience · 2026Article
- MCPmed: a call for Model Context Protocol-enabled bioinformatics web services for LLM-driven discovery.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Does interdisciplinary breadth shape research data sharing and citation impact? Evidence from six research fields.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2026Article
- Changes in ethics and transparency reporting in dental journal articles between 2021 and 2025: a full-text cross-journal analysis.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Making human derived data FAIR: feedback from NCI office of data sharing workshop.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Longitudinal dataset of journal data sharing policies across 22 disciplines for 2014 2019 and 2023.Scientific data · 2025Article
- How does academia recognize the contribution of scientific data? Evidence from data contributors' authorship.Scientific data · 2025Article
- From policy to practice: progress towards data- and code-sharing in ecology and evolution.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Perceived and observed biases within scientific communities: a case study in movement ecology.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Using Open Science Tools to Teach Environmental Sciences.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- FAIR data for optical tweezers experiments.Biophysical journal · 2025Review
- Article
- The academic impact of Open Science: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2025Review
- How will we prepare for an uncertain future? The value of open data and code for unborn generations facing climate change.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
77 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
Background. Attribution to the original contributor upon reuse of published data is important both as a reward for data creators and to document the provenance of research findings. Previous studies have found that papers with publicly available datasets receive a higher number of citations than similar studies without available data. However, few previous analyses have had the statistical power to control for the many variables known to predict citation rate, which has led to uncertain estimates of the "citation benefit". Furthermore, little is known about patterns in data reuse over time and across datasets. Method and Results. Here, we look at citation rates while controlling for many known citation predictors and investigate the variability of data reuse. In a multivariate regression on 10,555 studies that created gene expression microarray data, we found that studies that made data available in a public repository received 9% (95% confidence interval: 5% to 13%) more citations than similar studies for which the data was not made available. Date of publication, journal impact factor, open access status, number of authors, first and last author publication history, corresponding author country, institution citation history, and study topic were included as covariates. The citation benefit varied with date of dataset deposition: a citation benefit was most clear for papers published in 2004 and 2005, at about 30%. Authors published most papers using their own datasets within two years of their first publication on the dataset, whereas data reuse papers published by third-party investigators continued to accumulate for at least six years. To study patterns of data reuse directly, we compiled 9,724 instances of third party data reuse via mention of GEO or ArrayExpress accession numbers in the full text of papers. The level of third-party data use was high: for 100 datasets deposited in year 0, we estimated that 40 papers in PubMed reused a dataset by year 2, 100 by year 4, and more than 150 data reuse papers had been published by year 5. Data reuse was distributed across a broad base of datasets: a very conservative estimate found that 20% of the datasets deposited between 2003 and 2007 had been reused at least once by third parties. Conclusion. After accounting for other factors affecting citation rate, we find a robust citation benefit from open data, although a smaller one than previously reported. We conclude there is a direct effect of third-party data reuse that persists for years beyond the time when researchers have published most of the papers reusing their own data. Other factors that may also contribute to the citation benefit are considered. We further conclude that, at least for gene expression microarray data, a substantial fraction of archived datasets are reused, and that the intensity of dataset reuse has been steadily increasing since 2003.
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.