Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 8, 2025

Identification of Disease-related Spatial Covariance Patterns using Neuroimaging Data
Published on: June 26, 2013
Profile of Data Sharing in the Clinical Neurosciences
Keith A Hanson1, Nyle Almeida2, Jeffrey I Traylor3
1Department of Surgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, USA.
Importance:
In today's climate of high healthcare costs and limited research resources, much attention has been given to inefficiency in research. Open access to research data has been proposed as a way to pool resources and make the most of research funding while also promoting transparency and scientific rigor. Objective: The clinical neurosciences stand to benefit greatly from the potential opportunities afforded by open data, and we sought to evaluate the current state of publicly available research findings and data sharing policies within the clinical neurosciences. Design: The Clarivate Analytics Web of Science journal citation reports for 2017 were used to sort journals in the category 'Clinical Neurosciences' by impact factor. The top 50 journals were selected and reviewed, but data was only collected from journals focused on original research (42/50). For each journal we reviewed the 10 most recent original research articles for 2016, 2017, and 2018 as designated by Scopus. Results: A data sharing policy existed for 60% (25/42) of the journals reviewed. Of the articles studied 41% (517/1255) contained source data, and the amount of articles with available source data increased from 2016 to 2018. Of all the articles reviewed, 49.4% (620/1255) were open access. Overall, 6.9% (87/1255) of articles had their source data accessible outside of the manuscript (e.g. registries, databases, etc.) and 8.9% (112/1255) addressed the availability of their source data within the publication itself. The availability of source data outside the manuscript and in-article discussion of source data availability both increased from 2016 to 2018. Only 3.9% (49/1255) of articles reviewed reported negative results for their primary outcome, and 7.6% (95/1255) of the articles could not be defined as primarily reporting positive or negative findings (characterization studies, census reporting, etc.). The distribution of negative versus positive results reported showed no significant trend over the years studied. Conclusion and Relevance: Our results demonstrate an opportunity for increased data sharing in neuroscience original research. These findings also suggest a trend towards increased adoption of open data sharing policies among journals and increased availability of unprocessed data in publications. This can increase the quality and speed at which new research is developed in the clinical neurosciences.
More Related Videos
07:08A High Throughput, Multiplexed and Targeted Proteomic CSF Assay to Quantify Neurodegenerative Biomarkers and Apolipoprotein E Isoforms Status
Published on: October 20, 2016
06:32Author Spotlight: Automated Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease - Exploring the Possibilities and Challenges of Home Monitoring
Published on: July 14, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials: Overview
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Ethical Standards II
Nurses are entrusted with upholding various ethical principles and standards. Nurses forge solid therapeutic relationships using trust, empathy, autonomy, confidentiality, and professional competence.
Confidentiality is crucial, embodying respect for individual privacy...
Nursing Clinical Information System
A Nursing Clinical Information System (NCIS) is a specialized type of healthcare information system tailored to meet the unique needs of nursing practice. It incorporates the principles of nursing informatics to streamline information management and improve the quality of care delivery.
Critical attributes of NCIS include:
Statistical Software for Data Analysis and Clinical Trials
Preclinical Development: Overview