ArticleEuropean journal of clinical investigation2020
Tracing open data in emergencies: The case of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in European journal of clinical investigation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and predictors of data and code sharing in the medical and health sciences: systematic review with meta-analysis of individual participant data.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Pooled it
- The next viral pandemic-where do we stand?Folia microbiologica · 2025Review
- Nutrition in Pediatric Patients and Vulnerable Populations: Updates and Advances.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Analysis of shared research data in Spanish scientific papers about COVID-19: A first approach.Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · 2022Article
- Public View of Public Health Emergencies Based on Artificial Intelligence Data.Journal of environmental and public health · 2022Article
- Application of Artificial Intelligence in COVID-19 Diagnosis and Therapeutics.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Differences between the European Union and United States of America in Drug Regulatory Affairs Affect Global Patient Safety Standards and Public Health Awareness: The Case of Deferasirox and Other Iron Chelating Drugs.Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Next generation sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 genomes: challenges, applications and opportunities.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2021Article
- The sharing of research data facing the COVID-19 pandemic.Scientometrics · 2021Article
- Tracing open data in emergencies: The case of the COVID-19 pandemic.European journal of clinical investigation · 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic constitutes an ongoing, burning Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). In 2015, the World Health Organization adopted an open data policy recommendation in such situations.
objectivesThe present cross-sectional meta-research study aimed to assess the availability of open data and metrics of articles pertaining to the COVID-19 outbreak in five high-impact journals.
methodsAll articles regarding the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), published in five high-impact journals (Ann Intern Med, BMJ, JAMA, NEJM and Lancet) until March 14, 2020 were retrieved. Metadata (namely the type of article, number of authors, number of patients, citations, errata, news and social media mentions) were extracted for each article in each journal in a systematic way. Google Scholar and Scopus were used for citations and author metrics respectively, and Altmetrics and PlumX were used for news and social media mentions retrieval. The degree of adherence to the PHEIC open data call was also evaluated.
resultsA total of 140 articles were published until March 14, 2020, mostly opinion papers. Sixteen errata followed these publications. The number of authors in each article ranged from 1 to 63, whereas the number of patients with a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reached 2645. Extensive hyperauthorship was evident among case studies. The impact of these publications reached a total of 4210 cumulative crude citations and 342 790 news and social media mentions. Only one publication (0.7%) provided complete open data, while 32 (22.9%) included patient data.
conclusionsEven though a large number of manuscripts was produced since the pandemic, availability of open data remains restricted.
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.