Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30810796›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2019

Clinical trials in radiology and data sharing: results from a survey of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) research committee.

Maria Bosserdt, Bernd Hamm, Marc Dewey

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2019. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pixel Tampering: Does Face Redaction Harm Medical AI Performance?Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Application of Machine Learning to Breast MR Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Maria BosserdtDepartment of Radiology, Charite Medical School, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universitat Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Bernd HammDepartment of Radiology, Charite Medical School, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universitat Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Marc DeweyDepartment of Radiology, Charite Medical School, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universitat Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. marc.dewey@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4402-2733

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the current situation and future directions of clinical trials and data sharing in radiology.

methodsThis survey was conducted between July and September 2018 among European heads of imaging departments and speakers at the Clinical Trials in Radiology sessions at ECR 2015-2018. The survey was approved by the ESR research committee, was administered online, and chi-square tests were used.

resultsThe overall response rate was 29% (132/460). Responses were received from institutions in 29 countries. These institutions reported having conducted 429 trials, leading to 332 publications, of which 43% were first and 44% were last authorships by those institutions. For future trials, 98% of respondents (93/95) said they would be interested in sharing data, although only 34% had shared data already (23/68, p < 0.001). The major barriers to data sharing were data protection (78%, 74/95), ethical issues (49%, 47/95), and the lack of a data sharing platform (49%, 47/95). Of the respondents, 89% believed a platform would facilitate data sharing (85/95 vs. 10/95 did not, p < 0.001) and should offer easy data uploading (74%, 70/95), data safety (66%, 63/95), easy communication between providers and re-users (62%, 59/95), and data access policies (56%, 53/95).

conclusionA considerable number of imaging trials are being performed and published by radiologists in Europe whilst data sharing is hardly taking place, despite great interest. This is most likely due to data protection and ethical issues, as well as the absence of a data sharing platform. KEY POINTS: • Radiologists have performed a considerable number of more than 400 imaging trials in the last 5 years. • Although only 34% of institutions had shared trial data already, 98% are interested in doing so. • Major data sharing barriers are ethics, data protection, and the absence of a sharing platform.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicInformation DisseminationRadiologyEuropeForecastingHumansSocieties, MedicalSurveys and QuestionnairesClinical trialDiagnostic imagingInformation disseminationRandomized controlled trialSurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.