Back

Open Science and COVID-19 Randomized Controlled Trials: Examining Open Access, Preprinting, and Data Sharing-Related Practices During the Pandemic

Borghi, J. A.; Payne, C.; Ren, L.; Woodward, A. L.; Wong, C.; Stave, C.

2022-08-11 health policy
10.1101/2022.08.10.22278643
Show abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought substantial attention to the systems used to communicate biomedical research. In particular, the need to rapidly and credibly communicate research findings has led many stakeholders to encourage researchers to adopt open science practices such as posting preprints and sharing data. To examine the degree to which this has led to the adoption of such practices, we examined the "openness" of a sample of 539 published papers describing the results of randomized controlled trials testing interventions to prevent or treat COVID-19. The majority (56%) of the papers in this sample were free to read at the time of our investigation and 23.56% were preceded by preprints. However, there is no guarantee that the papers without an open license will be available without a subscription in the future, and only 49.61% of the preprints we identified were linked to the subsequent peer-reviewed version. Of the 331 papers in our sample with statements identifying if (and how) related datasets were available, only a paucity indicated that data was available in a repository that facilitates rapid verification and reuse. Our results demonstrate that, while progress has been made, there is still a significant mismatch between aspiration and the practice of open science in an important area of the COVID-19 literature. Open MaterialsWe are committed to making the details of our research process as open as possible. The data and code that underlie our analyses are archived and published through the Dryad Data Repository (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.mkkwh7137). Documentation and instructions for manuscript screening and data extraction are available on Protocols.io (https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.x54v9jx7zg3e/v1). Author contributions are outlined in Supplementary Table 1. O_TBL View this table: org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@774764org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@f03612org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@6e16ccorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@19ac3eborg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1b47f40_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_TBL O_FLOATNOSupplementary Table 1.C_FLOATNO O_TABLECAPTIONAuthor Information and Contributions C_TABLECAPTION C_TBL

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
based on 100 papers
Top 0.2%
14.2%
2
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 42%
12.0%
3
PLOS Biology
based on 14 papers
Top 0.1%
8.9%
4
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 20%
8.1%
5
eLife
based on 262 papers
Top 3%
5.7%
6
PNAS Nexus
based on 22 papers
Top 0.1%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
7
Nature Communications
based on 483 papers
Top 19%
3.2%
8
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
based on 11 papers
Top 0.4%
3.0%
9
Nature Medicine
based on 88 papers
Top 4%
2.6%
10
Nature
based on 58 papers
Top 3%
2.6%
11
BMJ Open
based on 553 papers
Top 34%
2.5%
12
BMC Medical Research Methodology
based on 41 papers
Top 2%
2.5%
13
F1000Research
based on 28 papers
Top 0.9%
2.5%
14
Nature Genetics
based on 72 papers
Top 6%
1.4%
15
PLOS Digital Health
based on 88 papers
Top 10%
1.3%
16
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
based on 29 papers
Top 2%
1.3%
17
Cell Genomics
based on 34 papers
Top 3%
0.9%
18
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
based on 23 papers
Top 1%
0.9%
19
JAMA Network Open
based on 125 papers
Top 17%
0.9%
20
Genome Biology
based on 14 papers
Top 1%
0.9%
21
Wellcome Open Research
based on 34 papers
Top 4%
0.7%
22
Nature Human Behaviour
based on 18 papers
Top 2%
0.7%
23
BMC Medicine
based on 155 papers
Top 23%
0.7%
24
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
based on 53 papers
Top 7%
0.7%
25
International Journal of Epidemiology
based on 65 papers
Top 9%
0.7%
26
Journal of Medical Internet Research
based on 81 papers
Top 15%
0.7%
27
Research Synthesis Methods
based on 17 papers
Top 1%
0.7%