ArticlePloS one2020
Primed to comply: Individual participant data sharing statements on ClinicalTrials.gov.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characteristics of interventional clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, 2018-2023.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Practice of data sharing plans in clinical trial registrations and concordance between registered and published data sharing plans: a cross-sectional study.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Completeness and changes in data reporting pharmacological interventions to treat COVID-19.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluating the current landscape of clinical trials registration and results reporting policies, procedures and staffing at US-based academic centers: Survey revisited.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- An assessment of the informative value of data sharing statements in clinical trial registries.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- A 10-year update to the principles for clinical trial data sharing by pharmaceutical companies: perspectives based on a decade of literature and policies.BMC medicine · 2023Article
- History and current status of clinical studies using human pluripotent stem cells.Stem cell reports · 2023Review
- COVID-19 interventional trials: Analysis of data sharing intentions during a time of pandemic.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Article
- Implementation of platform trials in the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid review.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Review
- Promotion of data sharing needs more than an emergency: An analysis of trends across clinical trials registered on the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.Wellcome open research · 2022Article
- Article
- Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2021Article
- COVID-19 trials: declarations of data sharing intentions at trial registration and at publication.Trials · 2021Review
- A scientificity and feasibility evaluation of COVID-19 clinical studies registered in China.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
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
In June 2017, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) announced a requirement that authors reporting the results of clinical trials to journals that follow ICMJE recommendations must include an individual participant data (IPD) sharing statement with manuscripts submitted after 01 July 2018. Additionally, all new clinical trials for which enrollment began on or after 01 January 2019 must include a data sharing statement in the trial's publicly posted registration. This study sought to understand whether IPD sharing statements of clinical trials first registered on ClinicalTrials.gov before 01 January 2019 reflected comprehension of the expectations and a willingness to share. To establish baseline characteristics for the prevalence and quality of IPD sharing statements, we examined IPD sharing statements among 2,040 clinical trials first posted on ClinicalTrials.gov between 01 January 2018 and 06 June 2018. Two independent coders further analyzed the quality of the IPD sharing statements of trials whose registration records indicated the intent to share IPD. The vast majority of trials included in this study did not indicate an intent to share IPD (n = 1,928; 94.5%). Among the trials that did commit to sharing IPD (n = 112, 5.5%), significant variability existed in the content and structure of IPD sharing statements. The results of this study suggest that successful compliance with the IPD sharing statement requirements of the ICMJE will require further clarification, enhanced education, and outreach to investigators.
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.