Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees
Objective To determine data sharing and number of publications coming from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committees (RECs).Design Cohort study.Inclusion criteria & setting All research databases listed on the...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020-09-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/9/e039756.full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841555764216332288 |
|---|---|
| author | Samantha Trace Mike Bracher Simon E Kolstoe |
| author_facet | Samantha Trace Mike Bracher Simon E Kolstoe |
| author_sort | Samantha Trace |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objective To determine data sharing and number of publications coming from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committees (RECs).Design Cohort study.Inclusion criteria & setting All research databases listed on the UK Health Research Authority’s Assessment Review Portal (HARP) that had received a favourable ethics opinion as of January 2018.Main outcome measures Publications and data access requests are either listed on HARP or notified through subsequent email correspondence.Results Out of 354 eligible databases, 34% had granted access requests and 40% had produced at least one peer-reviewed paper or conference abstract/talk. We could not establish contact with 9% of databases, and 19% reported no access requests or publications. Only 9% of databases were up to date with all annual reports. Email responses from database owners showed a range of attitudes towards data sharing.Conclusion Less than half of research databases that have received a favourable opinion from NHS research ethics committees share their data and produce publications. There is also considerable variability in the operation of research databases and understanding of the purpose of research databases. This work was hampered by incomplete records due mainly to researchers not submitting annual reports. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-8fc2c7126d1e4a41a1a889b73b9b542f |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2044-6055 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2020-09-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Open |
| spelling | doaj-art-8fc2c7126d1e4a41a1a889b73b9b542f2025-01-08T04:10:09ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552020-09-0110910.1136/bmjopen-2020-039756Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committeesSamantha Trace0Mike Bracher1Simon E Kolstoe2School of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK1 School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK1 School of Health and Care Professions, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UKObjective To determine data sharing and number of publications coming from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committees (RECs).Design Cohort study.Inclusion criteria & setting All research databases listed on the UK Health Research Authority’s Assessment Review Portal (HARP) that had received a favourable ethics opinion as of January 2018.Main outcome measures Publications and data access requests are either listed on HARP or notified through subsequent email correspondence.Results Out of 354 eligible databases, 34% had granted access requests and 40% had produced at least one peer-reviewed paper or conference abstract/talk. We could not establish contact with 9% of databases, and 19% reported no access requests or publications. Only 9% of databases were up to date with all annual reports. Email responses from database owners showed a range of attitudes towards data sharing.Conclusion Less than half of research databases that have received a favourable opinion from NHS research ethics committees share their data and produce publications. There is also considerable variability in the operation of research databases and understanding of the purpose of research databases. This work was hampered by incomplete records due mainly to researchers not submitting annual reports.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/9/e039756.full |
| spellingShingle | Samantha Trace Mike Bracher Simon E Kolstoe Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees BMJ Open |
| title | Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
| title_full | Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
| title_fullStr | Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
| title_full_unstemmed | Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
| title_short | Determining the level of data sharing, and number of publications, from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by UK research ethics committees |
| title_sort | determining the level of data sharing and number of publications from research databases that have been given a favourable opinion by uk research ethics committees |
| url | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/9/e039756.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT samanthatrace determiningthelevelofdatasharingandnumberofpublicationsfromresearchdatabasesthathavebeengivenafavourableopinionbyukresearchethicscommittees AT mikebracher determiningthelevelofdatasharingandnumberofpublicationsfromresearchdatabasesthathavebeengivenafavourableopinionbyukresearchethicscommittees AT simonekolstoe determiningthelevelofdatasharingandnumberofpublicationsfromresearchdatabasesthathavebeengivenafavourableopinionbyukresearchethicscommittees |