August 8th, 2018: Understanding and Remembrance Day for Severe ME
Have you heard of our Severe Myalgic Encephalomyelitis Day of Understanding and Remembrance? Please join Jody Smith in observing this day and honoring the 25% of those with ME/CFS who are most severely ill.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

(Not illness-specific) "Funding bodies will have to force scientists to share data" (just a blogpost

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by Dolphin, Aug 5, 2013.

  1. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    No specific news in this but I thought it was an interesting enough exploration of the issue of getting the raw data and what could be done.

    However, this may be a minority interest. A few of us have got more interested in this following the PACE Trial and the difficulties people have had with FOI requests e.g. for data promised in the published protocol.

    alex3619, biophile, Sean and 4 others like this.
  2. Simon


    Monmouth, UK
    Music, sweet music:
    Around half of all studies are never published, never mind much data behind published studies is kept under wraps
    The author, Michael Galsworthy goes on to argue that there are no penalities and few incentives to share data, and that making sharing data more attractive is important (eg crediting authors on papers published using their data). But ultimately a culture change is needed, he says, one that will only come if funders demand data from studies they fund is made freely available.

    Edit: this is interesting on why scientists might not share data:
    PLOS ONE: Willingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results
    Snow Leopard, biophile, Sean and 6 others like this.
  3. biophile

    biophile Places I'd rather be.

    The blog that Dolphin posted has numerous interesting links within the text, such as:

    Willingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results

    Background: The widespread reluctance to share published research data is often hypothesized to be due to the authors' fear that reanalysis may expose errors in their work or may produce conclusions that contradict their own. However, these hypotheses have not previously been studied systematically.

    Methods and Findings: We related the reluctance to share research data for reanalysis to 1148 statistically significant results reported in 49 papers published in two major psychology journals. We found the reluctance to share data to be associated with weaker evidence (against the null hypothesis of no effect) and a higher prevalence of apparent errors in the reporting of statistical results. The unwillingness to share data was particularly clear when reporting errors had a bearing on statistical significance.

    Conclusions: Our findings on the basis of psychological papers suggest that statistical results are particularly hard to verify when reanalysis is more likely to lead to contrasting conclusions. This highlights the importance of establishing mandatory data archiving policies.

    Wicherts JM, Bakker M, Molenaar D (2011) Willingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results. PLoS ONE 6(11): e26828. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0026828
    Esther12, Sean, Valentijn and 2 others like this.
  4. Sean

    Sean Senior Member


    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman
  5. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Yup, yup, yup.
    Valentijn and Firestormm like this.
  6. Firestormm


    Cornwall England
    Are we talking about making data available for published studies? I am a little confused. Or are they suggesting all submitted studies even those that don't get published? Thanks :)
  7. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    Hi Firestormm, the "Willingness" paper is about published results, but the first article is about both published and unpublished data. All scientific data should be shared in my view, and available. The original researchers then get cited when it is used. I can envisage a day when citation indexes include not just papers, but data stores.

    I still haven't read the "Willingness" paper in full, I am having a few bad brain days, but it is apparent that there is likely to be more error and biased results when data is not published.

    Valentijn and Firestormm like this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page