Journal Club: when the headline and findings diverge
This is Joseph.
This study has been making the rounds:
Now I want to be very careful here. What was the actual category (listed as #2 in the article:
The datasets are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Now look at what happens:
In summary, of 1792 e-mails sent, we did not receive any response for 1538 articles because messages were not delivered (N=77; 4.3%) or the author did not reply (N=1461; 81%). Responses were received from 254 (14%) contacted authors
So, first of all, I am not sure that we should consider the 4% who did not have a message delivered considered to be "non-compliant". That is important as the headline number of 93% did not respond includes those who were not actually successfully contacted. Of those responding, about 1/2 (122 vs 132) shared their data.
Then we have the most common reasons:
- The authors asked for more information about our study, but after our detailed response and clarification, we did not receive further response from them
- Their informed patient consent did not include sharing data with other researchers, or the ethical committee prohibited external data sharing and use
- They cannot access the data, either because they are no longer in the institution that conducted the research, or they are no longer active on the project
- They do not want to share the data or in any way participate in our study without a specific explanation
Some of these are declining to be in the study and (Read more...)