ArticleSystematic reviews2016
Time to consider sharing data extracted from trials included in systematic reviews.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Changing patterns in reporting and sharing of review data in systematic reviews with meta-analysis of the effects of interventions: cross sectional meta-research study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2022Pooled it
- Overview of systematic reviews on Chinese patented oral medicines for promoting blood circulation and removing blood stasis combined with western medicine in the treatment of coronary heart disease angina pectoris.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Systematic reviewers' perspectives on sharing review data, analytic code, and other materials: A survey.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2023Article
- The benefits of data sharing and ensuring open sources of systematic review data.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Perceptions and Opinions Towards Data-Sharing: A Survey of Addiction Journal Editorial Board Members.The journal of scientific practice and integrity · 2022Article
- The Systematic Review Data Repository (SRDR): descriptive characteristics of publicly available data and opportunities for research.Systematic reviews · 2019Article
- Editorial: Systematic review automation thematic series.Systematic reviews · 2019Article
- Increasing value and reducing waste in data extraction for systematic reviews: tracking data in data extraction forms.Systematic reviews · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile the debate regarding shared clinical trial data has shifted from whether such data should be shared to how this is best achieved, the sharing of data collected as part of systematic reviews has received little attention. In this commentary, we discuss the potential benefits of coordinated efforts to share data collected as part of systematic reviews. MAIN BODY: There are a number of potential benefits of systematic review data sharing. Shared information and data obtained as part of the systematic review process may reduce unnecessary duplication, reduce demand on trialist to service repeated requests from reviewers for data, and improve the quality and efficiency of future reviews. Sharing also facilitates research to improve clinical trial and systematic review methods and supports additional analyses to address secondary research questions. While concerns regarding appropriate use of data, costs, or the academic return for original review authors may impede more open access to information extracted as part of systematic reviews, many of these issues are being addressed, and infrastructure to enable greater access to such information is being developed.
conclusionEmbracing systems to enable more open access to systematic review data has considerable potential to maximise the benefits of research investment in undertaking systematic reviews.
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.