Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37545729›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2023

Data sharing in neurodegenerative disease research: challenges and learnings from the innovative medicines initiative public-private partnership model.

Angela Bradshaw, Nigel Hughes, David Vallez-Garcia, Davit Chokoshvili, Andrew Owens, Clint Hansen, Kirsten Emmert, Walter Maetzler, Lewis Killin, Rodrigo Barnes and 5 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Challenges in IBD Research 2024: Precision Medicine.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

15 authors.

Angela BradshawAlzheimer Europe, Luxembourg Ville, Luxembourg.
Nigel HughesJanssen Pharmaceutica NV, Beerse, Belgium.
David Vallez-GarciaDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Davit ChokoshviliBioinformatics Core, University of Luxembourg, Belvaux, Luxembourg.
Andrew OwensInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Clint HansenDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel and Kiel University, Kiel, Germany.
Kirsten EmmertDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel and Kiel University, Kiel, Germany.
Walter MaetzlerDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel and Kiel University, Kiel, Germany.
Lewis KillinSynapse Research Management Partners, Barcelona, Spain.
Rodrigo BarnesAridhia Informatics Ltd., Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Anthony J BrookesDepartment of Genetics and Genome Biology, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Pieter Jelle VisserPsychiatry and Neuropsychology, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Martin Hofmann-ApitiusFraunhofer Institute for Algorithms and Scientific Computing, Sankt Augustin, Germany.
Carlos DiazSynapse Research Management Partners, Barcelona, Spain.
Lennert SteukersJanssen Pharmaceutica NV, Beerse, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Efficient data sharing is hampered by an array of organizational, ethical, behavioral, and technical challenges, slowing research progress and reducing the utility of data generated by clinical research studies on neurodegenerative diseases. There is a particular need to address differences between public and private sector environments for research and data sharing, which have varying standards, expectations, motivations, and interests. The Neuronet data sharing Working Group was set up to understand the existing barriers to data sharing in public-private partnership projects, and to provide guidance to overcome these barriers, by convening data sharing experts from diverse projects in the IMI neurodegeneration portfolio. In this policy and practice review, we outline the challenges and learnings of the WG, providing the neurodegeneration community with examples of good practices and recommendations on how to overcome obstacles to data sharing. These obstacles span organizational issues linked to the unique structure of cross-sectoral, collaborative research initiatives, to technical issues that affect the storage, structure and annotations of individual datasets. We also identify sociotechnical hurdles, such as academic recognition and reward systems that disincentivise data sharing, and legal challenges linked to heightened perceptions of data privacy risk, compounded by a lack of clear guidance on GDPR compliance mechanisms for public-private research. Focusing on real-world, neuroimaging and digital biomarker data, we highlight particular challenges and learnings for data sharing, such as data management planning, development of ethical codes of conduct, and harmonization of protocols and curation processes. Cross-cutting solutions and enablers include the principles of transparency, standardization and co-design - from open, accessible metadata catalogs that enhance findability of data, to measures that increase visibility and trust in data reuse.

Indexed as

data sharingdigital endpointGDPRinnovative medicines initiativeneurodegenerative diseasereal world data

Identifiers

PMID37545729
PMCPMC10397390

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.