ReviewCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2026
Data sharing statements in five high-impact anesthesiology journals (2020-2023): a cross-sectional study.
Review in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn this study, we sought to evaluate the presence, quality, and accessibility of data sharing statements (DSS) in research articles published in five high-impact anesthesiology journals from 2020 to 2023. Data sharing is foundational to research transparency and reproducibility. As anesthesiology evolves, understanding how DSS are implemented in selected high-impact journals can inform open science efforts within anesthesiology research.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study of five top-ranked anesthesiology journals selected using 2023 Clarivate Journal Impact Factor (JIF) rankings. Eligible studies (2020-2023) were screened in duplicate using Rayyan, and data were extracted using a structured Google Form. We used a large language model (ChatGPT, GPT-4) to aid in the exploratory thematic development of DSS, with manual validation by investigators.
resultsAmong 1,123 included articles, DSS prevalence varied by journal and year. In Anaesthesia, Critical Care & Pain Medicine, articles with DSS increased from 15% (4/26) in 2020 to 30% (9/30) in 2023, whereas the prevalence of DSS remained below 8% in Anesthesia & Analgesia. Government-funded studies were more likely to include DSS (β = 0.734, P = 0.047), while higher JIF was negatively associated with DSS inclusion (β = -0.298, P = 0.008). Thematic analysis showed "Conditional Data Availability" was the most frequent DSS type (74%). Of authors contacted, 28% responded, and 14% ultimately agreed to share data for replication.
conclusionsWe found that DSS were underused in leading anesthesiology journals. Strengthening journal policies, funder mandates, and education on data sharing practices may promote greater transparency in anesthesia research. Because our analysis focused on a limited sample of journals, findings may not be generalizable to the entire field of anesthesiology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41963762What 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.