Vickers Andrew J
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Avenue, 2nd Floor, New York, NY, 10017, USA.
Trials. 2016 May 4;17(1):227. doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1369-2.
Ten years ago, one of the first papers published in Trials was a commentary entitled "Whose data set is it anyway?" The commentary pointed out that trialists routinely refused requests for data sharing and argued that this attitude was a community standard that had no rational basis. At the time, there had been few calls for clinical trial data sharing and certainly no institutional support. Today the situation could not be more different. Numerous organizations now recommend or require raw data to be made available, including the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, which recently proposed that clinical trial data sharing be a "condition of … publication." Furthermore, the literature is replete with papers covering an enormously wide variety of topics on data sharing. But despite a tectonic shift in attitudes, we are yet to see clinical trial data sharing become an unquestioned norm, where a researcher can readily download a data set from a trial almost as easily as they can now download a copy of the published paper. The battle over the next few years is to go beyond changing minds to ensuring that real data sets are routinely made available.
十年前,发表在《试验》(Trials)上的首批论文之一是一篇题为《到底是谁的数据集?》的评论文章。该评论指出,试验者通常会拒绝数据共享的请求,并认为这种态度是一种没有合理依据的行业标准。当时,几乎没有人呼吁进行临床试验数据共享,当然也没有机构支持。如今,情况截然不同。现在,许多组织都建议或要求提供原始数据,包括国际医学期刊编辑委员会,该委员会最近提议将临床试验数据共享作为“……发表的条件”。此外,文献中充斥着大量涵盖数据共享各种主题的论文。但是,尽管态度发生了巨大转变,我们尚未看到临床试验数据共享成为一种毋庸置疑的规范,即研究人员可以像现在轻松下载已发表论文的副本一样,轻松地从试验中下载数据集。未来几年的斗争是要超越改变观念,确保常规提供真实的数据集。