ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2020
Biomedical Data Sharing Among Researchers: A Study from Jordan.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Barriers impeding research data sharing on chronic disease prevention among the older adults in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Experiences of Health Research Data Sharing Among Researchers in Sub-Saharan Africa: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Standardizing digital biobanks: integrating imaging, genomic, and clinical data for precision medicine.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Review
- Systematic reviewers' perspectives on sharing review data, analytic code, and other materials: A survey.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2023Article
- Jordanian views regarding sharing of medical data for research: A cross-sectional study during COVID-19 pandemic.PloS one · 2022Observational
- Sharing, reuse, and storage of biosamples among biomedical researchers in Jordan: Practice and concerns.PloS one · 2022Article
- Data sharing and data governance in sub-Saharan Africa: Perspectives from researchers and scientists engaged in data-intensive research.South African journal of scienceArticle
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
Abstract
backgroundData sharing is an encouraged practice to support research in all fields. For that purpose, it is important to examine perceptions and concerns of researchers about biomedical data sharing, which was investigated in the current study.
methodsThis is a cross-sectional survey study that was distributed among biomedical researchers in Jordan, as an example of developing countries. The study survey consisted of questions about demographics and about respondent's attitudes toward sharing of biomedical data.
resultsAmong study participants, 46.9% (n=82) were positive regarding making their research data available to the public, whereas 53.1% refused the idea. The reasons for refusing to publicly share their data included "lack of regulations" (33.5%), "access to research data should be limited to the research team" (29.5%), "no place to deposit the data" (6.5%), and "lack of funding for data deposition" (6.0%). Agreement with the idea of making data available was associated with academic rank (
conclusionAbout half of the respondents reported a positive attitude toward biomedical data sharing. Proper regulations and facilitation data deposition can enhance data sharing in Jordan.
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.