ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025
The State of Data Sharing in Plastic Surgery: An Analysis of Journal Practices and Author Adherence.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Data sharing is crucial for transparency and reproducibility in research. We aim to evaluate data sharing practices in plastic surgery research, focusing on data sharing statements (DSSs), identifying key trends, and assessing follow-through. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the top 7 plastic surgery journals, selecting original research articles published from 2018 to 2023. Data extraction was performed in a masked duplicate manner, capturing DSS presence, funding sources, study design, and publication year. Trends in DSS inclusion over time, study designs, and journals were analyzed. A thematic analysis was conducted on DSS content. Corresponding authors of studies that stated data were available upon request were contacted to assess follow-through. Results: Our review included 727 articles, with only 1.51% (11 out of 727) including DSS. DSS prevalence varied, with the highest in Conclusions: Data sharing practices in plastic surgery journals are inconsistent. Although DSS inclusion is encouraged, many studies still lack DSS, and the quality varies. Clearer mandates and enforcement are needed for effective data sharing.
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.