ArticlePloS one2021
Barriers and facilitators to qualitative data sharing in the United States: A survey of qualitative researchers.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data sharing statements: impact of journal policies across clinical research disciplines.European heart journal · 2026Article
- Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Investigating the practices and preferences of health scholars in sharing open research data.PloS one · 2025Article
- Designing for data sharing: Considerations for advancing health equity in data management and dissemination.Translational behavioral medicine · 2024Article
- Data as scientific currency: Challenges experienced by researchers with sharing health data in sub-Saharan Africa.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Lessons Learned Establishing the Palliative Care Research Cooperative's Qualitative Data Repository.Journal of pain and symptom management · 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
- 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
- How do we measure the costs, benefits, and harms of sharing data from biomedical studies? A protocol for a scoping review.Open research Europe · 2023Article
- Qualitative data sharing practices in clinical trials in the UK and Ireland: towards the production of good practice guidance.HRB open research · 2023Article
- Responsible Sharing of Qualitative Research Data: Insights From a Pioneering Project in the United States.International journal of qualitative methodsArticle
- A Content Analysis of 100 Qualitative Health Research Articles to Examine Researcher-Participant Relationships and Implications for Data Sharing.International journal of qualitative methodsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Qualitative health data are rarely shared in the United States (U.S.). This is unfortunate because gathering qualitative data is labor and time-intensive, and data sharing enables secondary research, training, and transparency. A new U.S. federal policy mandates data sharing by 2023, and is agnostic to data type. We surveyed U.S. qualitative researchers (N = 425) on the barriers and facilitators of sharing qualitative health or sensitive research data. Most researchers (96%) have never shared qualitative data in a repository. Primary concerns were lack of participant permission to share data, data sensitivity, and breaching trust. Researcher willingness to share would increase if participants agreed and if sharing increased the societal impact of their research. Key resources to increase willingness to share were funding, guidance, and de-identification assistance. Public health and biomedical researchers were most willing to share. Qualitative researchers need to prepare for this new reality as sharing qualitative data requires unique considerations.
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.