Data Sharing & Reanalysis

Explores the effectiveness of data sharing in two journals.

http://www.bmj.com/content/360/bmj.k400

Relevant as J Coyne has not received data from:

Adaptive Pacing, Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, Graded Exercise, and Specialist Medical Care for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0040808

 

The data shared is a check on research integrity by anyone motivated and qualified that questions research reports in a journal.
The NIH have been pushing for common data elements since around 2006 that would enable combination of data sets although the words "data parasite" have been bandied about by those unhappy about such openness / sharing /transparency.

 

[My bold]

Oh well, that argument is obviously completely rational, given how they fully justify their reasoning for it not being appropriate ... not! .

 

The MRC list that objective on their website:
Every year, the MRC invests around £850 million of public money in research, the primary output of which is data. We want to maximise the research opportunities that such a diversity, richness and quantity of data provides. One of the best ways of achieving this is to ensure that data are properly preserved for sharing and informed use beyond the originating research teams
https://www.mrc.ac.uk/research/policies-and-guidance-for-researchers/data-sharing/

As guidance on the use of publicly funded research and ethical responsibility for the implicit contract between research participants and researchers that demonstrable benefit has come from public spiritedness, the MRC page reads as though it were a letter to Santa wish list.