ArticleEuropean heart journal2026
Data sharing statements: impact of journal policies across clinical research disciplines.
Article in European heart journal, 2026. 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 Availability Statements of Publications in Journals Indexed in the Dentistry, Oral Surgery and Medicine Category of Journal Citation Reports: A Meta-Research Study.International dental journal · 2026Review
- Data sharing in acupuncture meta-analyses: Associations with journal policies and practical considerations.Integrative medicine research · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsCardiovascular disease is a leading cause of mortality, with significant investments in research to improve treatment and prevention. Data sharing enhances transparency, reproducibility, and collaboration, yet data sharing statement (DSS) inclusion remains inconsistent. This study evaluates DSS prevalence, content, and influencing factors in high-impact cardiology journals, examines journal policy influence, and assesses data sharing feasibility by contacting authors who indicated data availability.
methodsA cross-sectional analysis was conducted to assess DSS inclusion in top cardiology, selected general medicine, emergency medicine, and orthopaedic surgery journals. A systematic PubMed search identified clinical studies published from 2020 to 2023. Logistic regression models assessed factors associated with DSS inclusion, while thematic analysis categorized DSS content. Corresponding authors who indicated data availability upon request were contacted to evaluate follow-through.
resultsAmong 2941 articles, 1004 (34.14%) included a DSS. Data sharing statement prevalence varied by discipline: cardiology (52%), general medicine (96%), emergency medicine (12%), and orthopedic surgery (14%). Policy enforcement drove DSS inclusion, with post-policy articles significantly more likely to contain a DSS. Funding status, study design, article access, and impact factor also influenced DSS presence. Thematic analysis identified conditional availability and gatekeeping as dominant DSS themes. Of authors who stated data were available upon request, only 31% ultimately provided access.
conclusionsData sharing statement inclusion in cardiology research remains inconsistent, with journal policies playing a key role in increasing prevalence. However, real-world data-sharing practices often fall short of stated commitments. Addressing logistical and financial barriers will be essential to improving data availability in cardiology research.
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.