ArticleBMJ open2025
Assessing the prevalence, quality and compliance of data-sharing statements in gastroenterology publications: a cross-sectional analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data sharing in acupuncture meta-analyses: Associations with journal policies and practical considerations.Integrative medicine research · 2026Article
- Evaluating the prevalence and application of data sharing statements in high-impact ophthalmology journals.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the current state of data-sharing practices in gastroenterology literature, focusing on data-sharing statements (DSS) and identifying influential factors on DSS inclusion.
backgroundHigh-quality, reproducible research is crucial in addressing the widespread prevalence of gastrointestinal diseases. Data-sharing practices enable researchers to access studies more easily, enhancing reproducibility. Our study aims to analyse the inclusion and influence of DSS in top gastroenterology journals.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis to examine the use and contents of DSS in gastroenterology clinical trials. Using Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports, we selected five leading gastroenterology journals. Then, we searched MEDLINE (PubMed) for original research articles published between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2023. In a double-blind, duplicate manner, data were extracted on DSS presence, funding source, study design and open-access status. We then conducted a thematic analysis of all DSS. Additionally, authors were contacted and given 14 days to respond or share data to investigate adherence to their DSS.
resultsOf the 953 articles that met inclusion criteria, 400 (400/953; 42.0%) contained a DSS. Open-access articles had a higher likelihood of containing DSS (estimate=0·413; p<0.05).
conclusionOur findings reveal significant variability in DSS inclusion and adherence among top gastroenterology journals. Journals with mandatory data-sharing policies demonstrated higher compliance, while open-access status and journal impact factor were positively associated with data-sharing practices. However, a notable gap remains in authors' follow-through on stated data-sharing commitments.
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.