ArticleScientific data2025
Publication of data sharing statements in clinical trials by cardiovascular journals: a quantitative and qualitative analysis.
Article in Scientific data, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Many cardiovascular disease (CVD) journals request data sharing statements upon trial report submission, but their compliance in publishing these statements remains unclear. We therefore performed a quantitative analysis to evaluate the current practice of the publications of data sharing statements in clinical trials by CVD journals, which included 78 CVD journals that published clinical trials from Jan 2019 to Dec 2022 and had data sharing statement request. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between journal characteristics and journals' publications of statements. We also ran an online qualitative survey by sending anonymous questionnaires to editors-in-chief from CVD journals for their opinions on journals' publications of statements, trying to further explore why the journals did not publish statements. Their perspectives could provide in-depth information on and new insights into promoting publications of data sharing statements. This quantitative and qualitative analysis assessing the current practice of publishing data sharing statements by CVD journals, may generate new evidence to promote the actual data sharing and transparency in CVD trials.
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.