Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40298095›Full record

ArticleAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2025

Open science? Responsiveness to requests for data in a review of smoking cessation interventions.

Yifei Pei, Mayla Gilliam, Olivia Listrom, Andrea Bermudez, Alexander Kenny, Marijn de Bruin, Seth M Noar, Adam O Goldstein, Paschal Sheeran

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Yifei PeiDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.
Mayla GilliamDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.
Olivia ListromDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.
Andrea BermudezDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.
Alexander KennyDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.
Marijn de BruinRadboud Institute of Health Sciences, IQ Health, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Seth M NoarHussman School of Journalism and Media, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, United States.
Adam O GoldsteinLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.
Paschal SheeranDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7449-4590

Funding

State-of-the-Art Synthesis of Interventions to Promote Quit Intentions and Smoking CessationR01CA242746 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI SHEERAN, PASCHAL · 2021 to 2023
$948k
NCI NIH HHS 1R01CA242746-01A1NCI NIH HHS R01 CA242746
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveLittle research has examined rates or correlates of adherence to Open Science practices such as data sharing. We investigated how often researchers share data for inclusion in a meta-analysis and their reasons for not sharing data, and tested factors that could be associated with data sharing.

methodsWe requested data for 189 studies (167 authors) as part of a National Cancer Institute-funded meta-analysis of quit intentions and smoking cessation. Authors were contacted via email up to 4 times. We tracked responses, reasons for not sharing data, and coded 23 features of the author team (eg, number of authors and h-index), the request (eg, amount of information requested), and the study (eg, year of publication and preregistration).

resultsThirty-five percent of authors provided the requested data, 21% responded but did not provide data, and 44% never responded to our request. Of the 37 reasons offered for not sharing data, the most common were loss of access to data (76%) and lack of time (11%). More recent trials, fewer citations, publication in medical (vs. behavioral) journals, and study preregistration were each associated with providing the requested data (Ps < .05).

conclusionsContacting authors for unpublished data resulted in a moderate response rate (56%) and modest provision of data (35%). Barriers to data sharing such as access and time constraints highlight challenges faced by behavioral health researchers in promoting transparency. The factors associated with responsiveness underscore the importance of journal policies and Open Science practices in enhancing data sharing.

Indexed as

Information DisseminationSmoking CessationHumansMeta-Analysis as Topicmeta-analysispre-registrationreplicabilityreproducibility

Identifiers

PMID40298095
PMCPMC12038392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.