ArticleQualitative psychology (Washington, D.C.)2018
Is It Time to Share Qualitative Research Data?
Article in Qualitative psychology (Washington, D.C.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Developing a Data Note reporting guideline for qualitative health and social care research datasets (the DeNOTE study): A study protocol.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 2025Article
- Dataset for a qualitative interview study exploring the barriers and facilitators to using and recommending aspirin for cancer prevention.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 2025Article
- Reflection over compliance: Critiquing mandatory data sharing policies for qualitative research.Journal of health psychology · 2024Article
- A guide for social science journal editors on easing into open science.Research integrity and peer review · 2024Article
- Publishing publicly available interview data: an empirical example of the experience of publishing interview data.Frontiers in sociology · 2024Article
- Re-use of research data in the social sciences. Use and users of digital data archive.PloS one · 2024Article
- Exchanging words: Engaging the challenges of sharing qualitative research data.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- When open data closes the door: A critical examination of the past, present and the potential future for open data guidelines in journals.The British journal of social psychology · 2023Article
- Expanding the ethnographic toolkit: Using medical documents to include kinless older adults living with dementia in qualitative research.Journal of aging studies · 2023Article
- Potentially Identifying Variables Reported in 100 Qualitative Health Research Articles: Implications for Data Sharing and Secondary Analysis.Forum, qualitative social research · 2023Article
- Qualitative data sharing practices in clinical trials in the UK and Ireland: towards the production of good practice guidance.HRB open research · 2023Article
- A primer for choosing, designing and evaluating registered reports for qualitative methods.Open research Europe · 2023Article
- Qualitative Data Sharing: Participant Understanding, Motivation, and Consent.Qualitative health research · 2022Article
- Article
- Barriers and facilitators to qualitative data sharing in the United States: A survey of qualitative researchers.PloS one · 2021Article
- A study protocol of qualitative data sharing practices in clinical trials in the UK and Ireland: towards the production of good practice guidance.HRB open research · 2021Article
- Research Participant Views regarding Qualitative Data Sharing.Ethics & human research · 2020Article
- Are we ready to share qualitative research data? Knowledge and preparedness among qualitative researchers, IRB Members, and data repository curators.IASSIST quarterly · 2020Article
- Examining Data Repository Guidelines for Qualitative Data Sharing.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Policies by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, as well as scandals surrounding failures to reproduce the findings of key studies in psychology, have generated increased calls for sharing research data. Most of these discussions have focused on quantitative, rather than qualitative, research data. This paper examines scientific, ethical, and policy issues surrounding sharing qualitative research data. We consider advantages of sharing data, including enabling verification of findings, promoting new research in an economical manner, supporting research education, and fostering public trust in science. We then examine standard procedures for archiving and sharing data, such as anonymizing data and establishing data use agreements. Finally, we engage a series of concerns with sharing qualitative research data such as the importance of relationships in interpreting data, the risk of re-identifying participants, issues surrounding consent and data ownership, and the burden of data documentation and depositing on researchers. For each concern, we identify options that enable data sharing or describe conditions under which select data might be withheld from a data repository. We conclude by suggesting that the default assumption should be that qualitative data will be shared unless concerns exist that cannot be addressed through standard data depositing practices such as anonymizing data or through data use agreements.
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.