ArticlePloS one2016
Water, Water, Everywhere: Defining and Assessing Data Sharing in Academia.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Structured Data Management and Sharing Plan (DMSP) templates outperformed non-structured ones in an institutional implementation of the NIH Data Management and Sharing (DMS) policy.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Article
- How often do cancer researchers make their data and code available and what factors are associated with sharing?BMC medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Practical considerations for a library's research data management services: the case of the National Institutes of Health Library.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
- Article
- Data management and sharing in neuroimaging: Practices and perceptions of MRI researchers.PloS one · 2018Article
- Launch of the National Trauma Research Repository coincides with new data sharing requirements.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2018Article
- 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
- 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.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 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.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2017Article
- Article
- Article
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
Sharing of research data has begun to gain traction in many areas of the sciences in the past few years because of changing expectations from the scientific community, funding agencies, and academic journals. National Science Foundation (NSF) requirements for a data management plan (DMP) went into effect in 2011, with the intent of facilitating the dissemination and sharing of research results. Many projects that were funded during 2011 and 2012 should now have implemented the elements of the data management plans required for their grant proposals. In this paper we define 'data sharing' and present a protocol for assessing whether data have been shared and how effective the sharing was. We then evaluate the data sharing practices of researchers funded by the NSF at Oregon State University in two ways: by attempting to discover project-level research data using the associated DMP as a starting point, and by examining data sharing associated with journal articles that acknowledge NSF support. Sharing at both the project level and the journal article level was not carried out in the majority of cases, and when sharing was accomplished, the shared data were often of questionable usability due to access, documentation, and formatting issues. We close the article by offering recommendations for how data producers, journal publishers, data repositories, and funding agencies can facilitate the process of sharing data in a meaningful way.
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.