ArticlePloS one2015
Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 108 papers, 7 of them syntheses 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
108 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 452 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global landscape for pulmonary fibrosis treatment: a data-driven perspective from clinical trials.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Pooled it
- The state of data sharing in rheumatology: a systematic review of top journal practices.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Identifying the most important facilitators of open research data sharing and reuse in Epidemiology: A mixed-methods study.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Prevalence and predictors of data and code sharing in the medical and health sciences: systematic review with meta-analysis of individual participant data.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic review of the status of veterinary epidemiological research in two species regarding the FAIR guiding principles.BMC veterinary research · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic literature review of researchers' and healthcare professionals' attitudes towards the secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data.Systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- The tragedy of the biodiversity data commons: a data impediment creeping nigher?Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2018Pooled it
- Reproducibility in biomedical research.Nature medicine · 2026Review
- Global Camera Trapping Inventory (GCTI) v.1.0: A worldwide inventory of camera-trapping studies for spatial biodiversity analysis.Zoological research · 2026Article
- Data sharing statements: impact of journal policies across clinical research disciplines.European heart journal · 2026Article
- The Role of Data Papers in Scientific Data Dissemination and Reuse.Scientific data · 2026Article
- The global clinical trial landscape of lung cancer cellular therapy current status trends and scientific challenges.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Renal Clinical Study Participants Support Data Sharing and Use of Artificial Intelligence.Kidney international reports · 2026Article
- Autism data sharing: Benefits, challenges, and recommendations.PLOS digital health · 2026Review
- Contemporary global research cultures: results from a global survey about research conditions.F1000Research · 2026Article
- Unmasking the ethical dimensions of data-sharing in health research: perspectives from researchers at a public university in Uganda.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- How does academia recognize the contribution of scientific data? Evidence from data contributors' authorship.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Making genomic data FAIR through effective Data Portals.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Experiences of Health Research Data Sharing Among Researchers in Sub-Saharan Africa: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Software bug report dataset from Eclipse projects.Data in brief · 2025Article
48 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The incorporation of data sharing into the research lifecycle is an important part of modern scholarly debate. In this study, the DataONE Usability and Assessment working group addresses two primary goals: To examine the current state of data sharing and reuse perceptions and practices among research scientists as they compare to the 2009/2010 baseline study, and to examine differences in practices and perceptions across age groups, geographic regions, and subject disciplines. We distributed surveys to a multinational sample of scientific researchers at two different time periods (October 2009 to July 2010 and October 2013 to March 2014) to observe current states of data sharing and to see what, if any, changes have occurred in the past 3-4 years. We also looked at differences across age, geographic, and discipline-based groups as they currently exist in the 2013/2014 survey. Results point to increased acceptance of and willingness to engage in data sharing, as well as an increase in actual data sharing behaviors. However, there is also increased perceived risk associated with data sharing, and specific barriers to data sharing persist. There are also differences across age groups, with younger respondents feeling more favorably toward data sharing and reuse, yet making less of their data available than older respondents. Geographic differences exist as well, which can in part be understood in terms of collectivist and individualist cultural differences. An examination of subject disciplines shows that the constraints and enablers of data sharing and reuse manifest differently across disciplines. Implications of these findings include the continued need to build infrastructure that promotes data sharing while recognizing the needs of different research communities. Moving into the future, organizations such as DataONE will continue to assess, monitor, educate, and provide the infrastructure necessary to support such complex grand science challenges.
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.