Abstract
Background: Demand for rehabilitation services is rising. High-quality research is essential to address these challenges, with recent mandates emphasizing the importance of data sharing for transparency and reproducibility. Despite these mandates, significant gaps in data sharing persist, even with the increasing importance of data sharing statements (DSS).
Methods: A search was conducted on June 6th, 2024 using PubMed/MEDLINE to identify clinical studies from five of the top rehabilitation journals based on impact factor. We extracted DSS and general characteristics in a duplicated and masked fashion to identify influential factors on DSS inclusion using hierarchical logistic regression. Further we qualified these statements through thematic analysis. Lastly, email requests were sent to verify willingness to share data.
Results: Of 1,278 studies that underwent data extraction, 25.5% of studies in our sample featured a DSS; however, this figure was significantly influenced by one journal with a 99% inclusion rate, while the other four journals collectively had only a 5% rate. Further analysis of 314 DSS revealed the majority designated a gatekeeper role for handling data requests. After emailing authors to verify their commitment to the reported DSS, only 22.7% were willing to adhere to them.
Conclusions: Our study revealed notable discrepancies between journal policies and their impact on DSS. We recommend adopting the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) to provide a framework for data sharing in the field of rehabilitation. Further standardization of DSS is needed, as alternative methods like data repositories have been shown to improve transparency and reproducibility.
Methods: A search was conducted on June 6th, 2024 using PubMed/MEDLINE to identify clinical studies from five of the top rehabilitation journals based on impact factor. We extracted DSS and general characteristics in a duplicated and masked fashion to identify influential factors on DSS inclusion using hierarchical logistic regression. Further we qualified these statements through thematic analysis. Lastly, email requests were sent to verify willingness to share data.
Results: Of 1,278 studies that underwent data extraction, 25.5% of studies in our sample featured a DSS; however, this figure was significantly influenced by one journal with a 99% inclusion rate, while the other four journals collectively had only a 5% rate. Further analysis of 314 DSS revealed the majority designated a gatekeeper role for handling data requests. After emailing authors to verify their commitment to the reported DSS, only 22.7% were willing to adhere to them.
Conclusions: Our study revealed notable discrepancies between journal policies and their impact on DSS. We recommend adopting the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) to provide a framework for data sharing in the field of rehabilitation. Further standardization of DSS is needed, as alternative methods like data repositories have been shown to improve transparency and reproducibility.
| Original language | American English |
|---|---|
| State | Published - 14 Feb 2025 |
| Event | Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences Research Week 2025 - Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, United States Duration: 10 Feb 2025 → 14 Feb 2025 https://medicine.okstate.edu/research/research_days.html |
Conference
| Conference | Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences Research Week 2025 |
|---|---|
| Country/Territory | United States |
| City | Tulsa |
| Period | 10/02/25 → 14/02/25 |
| Internet address |
Keywords
- rehabilitation
- cross-sectional analysis
- data sharing
- data sharing statements