ArticleEuropean journal of psychotraumatology2023
Data sharing and re-use in the traumatic stress field: An international survey of trauma researchers.
Article in European journal of psychotraumatology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Post-traumatic stress disorder, trauma and parenting stress: an individual participant data meta-analysis.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Pooled 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
- Pooling data from studies on prolonged grief: the Multi-region Archive of Research data on Bereavement and Loss from Empirical Studies (MARBLES) project.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2026Article
- Advancing PTSD-Substance Use Comorbidity Treatment Research Through Applying FAIR and FACT Data Science Frameworks inJournal of studies on alcohol and drugs · 2026Article
- Methods for integrating public datasets: insights from youth disaster mental health research.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Article
- Does the emotional burden of participating in trauma-related surveys discourage future participation? A population-based study.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Article
- Making trauma ecological momentary assessment studies FAIR: review of design considerations and data procedures.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Review
- A FAIR intensive longitudinal data archive on prolonged grief in daily life.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Article
- Sharing traumatic stress research data: assessing and reducing the risk of re-identification.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Review
- Advances, challenges, and future directions in trauma-related Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable (FAIR) data efforts.Journal of traumatic stress · 2025Review
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe FAIR data principles aim to make scientific data more Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable. In the field of traumatic stress research, FAIR data practices can help accelerate scientific advances to improve clinical practice and can reduce participant burden. Previous studies have identified factors that influence data sharing and re-use among scientists, such as normative pressure, perceived career benefit, scholarly altruism, and availability of data repositories. No prior study has examined researcher views and practices regarding data sharing and re-use in the traumatic stress field.
objectiveTo investigate the perspectives and practices of traumatic stress researchers around the world concerning data sharing, re-use, and the implementation of FAIR data principles in order to inform development of a FAIR Data Toolkit for traumatic stress researchers.
methodA total of 222 researchers from 28 countries participated in an online survey available in seven languages, assessing their views on data sharing and re-use, current practices, and potential facilitators and barriers to adopting FAIR data principles.
resultsThe majority of participants held a positive outlook towards data sharing and re-use, endorsing strong scholarly altruism, ethical considerations supporting data sharing, and perceiving data re-use as advantageous for improving research quality and advancing the field. Results were largely consistent with prior surveys of scientists across a wide range of disciplines. A significant proportion of respondents reported instances of data sharing and re-use, but gold standard practices such as formally depositing data in established repositories were reported as infrequent. The study identifies potential barriers such as time constraints, funding, and familiarity with FAIR principles.
conclusionsThese results carry crucial implications for promoting change and devising a FAIR Data Toolkit tailored for traumatic stress researchers, emphasizing aspects such as study planning, data preservation, metadata standardization, endorsing data re-use, and establishing metrics to assess scientific and societal impact.
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.