ArticleBMC medicine2015
How should individual participant data (IPD) from publicly funded clinical trials be shared?
Article in BMC medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 47 papers, 3 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.
Slashing Two-wheeled Accidents by Leveraging Eyecare: a Stepped-wedge Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial to Assess Impact of Spectacles on Reducing Crash and Near-crash Events Among Myopic Motorcycle Drivers in Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
StratCare Trial 2: Evaluating the Clinical and Cost-effectiveness of AI-driven Stratified Care for Depression
Who cites it
47 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Exploring changes over time and characteristics associated with data retrieval across individual participant data meta-analyses: systematic review.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Pooled it
- Tuberculosis incidence is high in HIV-infected African children but is reduced by co-trimoxazole and time on antiretroviral therapy.BMC medicine · 2016Trial
- Attitudes of Longitudinal Study Participants and Members of the Public Towards Data Sharing for Secondary Research: A Survey Based Approach.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026Article
- A single-centre randomised, feasibility study using point-of-care (POC) testing for respiratory viruses to direct oral corticosteroids use in preschool-aged children with acute wheeze: a protocol.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Medical researchers' perception of sharing of metadata from case report forms.Learning health systems · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- Article
- Pharmacokinetic analysis across studies to drive knowledge-integration: A tutorial on individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA).CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- The benefits of data sharing and ensuring open sources of systematic review data.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Current recommendations/practices for anonymising data from clinical trials in order to make it available for sharing: A scoping review.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2022Article
- Developing a topic-based repository of clinical trial individual patient data: experiences and lessons learned from a pilot project.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- MarkVCID cerebral small vessel consortium: I. Enrollment, clinical, fluid protocols.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2021Article
- Discoverability of information on clinical trial data-sharing platforms.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIndividual participant data (IPD) from completed clinical trials should be responsibly shared to support efficient clinical research, generate new knowledge and bring benefit to patients. The Medical Research Council (MRC) Hubs for Trials Methodology Research (HTMR) has developed guidance to facilitate the sharing of IPD from publicly funded clinical trials.
methodsDevelopment of the guidance was completed over four phases which included a focussed review of policy documents, a web-based survey of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration (CRC) Registered Clinical Trials Units (CTU) Network, participation of an expert committee and an open consultation with the UKCRC Registered CTU Network. The project was funded by the MRC HTMR (MR/L004933/1-R39).
resultsGood practice principles include: (i) the use of a controlled access approach, using a transparent and robust system to review requests and provide secure data access; (ii) seeking consent for sharing IPD from trial participants in all future clinical trials with adequate assurance that patient privacy and confidentiality can be maintained; and (iii) establishing an approach to resource the sharing of IPD which would include support from trial funders, sponsor organisations and users of IPD. The guidance has been endorsed by Cancer Research UK, MRC Methodology Research Programme Advisory Group, Wellcome Trust and the Executive Group of the UKCRC Registered CTU Network. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) has confirmed it is supportive of the application of this guidance.
conclusionsImplementation of these principles will improve transparency, increase the coherent sharing of IPD from publicly funded trials, and help publicly funded trials to adhere to trial funder and journal requirements for data sharing.
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.