• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Promoting Data Sharing: The Moral Obligations of Public Funding Agencies.促进数据共享:公共资助机构的道德义务。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2024 Aug 6;30(4):35. doi: 10.1007/s11948-024-00491-3.
2
Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis.抗抑郁药治疗成人慢性疼痛的疼痛管理:一项网络荟萃分析。
Health Technol Assess. 2024 Oct;28(62):1-155. doi: 10.3310/MKRT2948.
3
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.系统性药理学治疗慢性斑块状银屑病:网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4.
4
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.慢性斑块状银屑病的全身药理学治疗:一项网状Meta分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 9;1(1):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub3.
5
Behavioral interventions to reduce risk for sexual transmission of HIV among men who have sex with men.降低男男性行为者中艾滋病毒性传播风险的行为干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jul 16(3):CD001230. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001230.pub2.
6
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.慢性斑块状银屑病的全身药理学治疗:一项网状荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 22;12(12):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub2.
7
Psychological interventions for adults who have sexually offended or are at risk of offending.针对有性犯罪行为或有性犯罪风险的成年人的心理干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12(12):CD007507. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007507.pub2.
8
What Do the Various Principles of Justice Mean Within the Concept of Benefit Sharing?在利益分享概念中,各种正义原则意味着什么?
J Bioeth Inq. 2016 Jun;13(2):281-93. doi: 10.1007/s11673-016-9706-4. Epub 2016 Jan 29.
9
The quantity, quality and findings of network meta-analyses evaluating the effectiveness of GLP-1 RAs for weight loss: a scoping review.评估胰高血糖素样肽-1受体激动剂(GLP-1 RAs)减肥效果的网状Meta分析的数量、质量及结果:一项范围综述
Health Technol Assess. 2025 Jun 25:1-73. doi: 10.3310/SKHT8119.
10
Home treatment for mental health problems: a systematic review.心理健康问题的居家治疗:一项系统综述
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(15):1-139. doi: 10.3310/hta5150.

引用本文的文献

1
Awareness of FAIR and FAIR4RS among international research software funders.国际科研软件资助者对FAIR及FAIR4RS的认知。
Sci Data. 2025 Apr 15;12(1):627. doi: 10.1038/s41597-025-04820-4.
2
Deciphering the past status and future tendency: a comprehensive scientometric study on developmental dysplasia of the hip.解读过去状况与未来趋势:一项关于发育性髋关节发育不良的全面科学计量学研究
J Orthop Surg Res. 2024 Dec 19;19(1):853. doi: 10.1186/s13018-024-05358-8.
3
German funders' data sharing policies-A qualitative interview study.德国资助者的数据共享政策——一项定性访谈研究。
PLoS One. 2024 Feb 8;19(2):e0296956. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296956. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

1
German funders' data sharing policies-A qualitative interview study.德国资助者的数据共享政策——一项定性访谈研究。
PLoS One. 2024 Feb 8;19(2):e0296956. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296956. eCollection 2024.
2
Patient data for commercial companies? An ethical framework for sharing patients' data with for-profit companies for research.商业公司获取患者数据?关于与营利性公司共享患者数据用于研究的伦理框架。
J Med Ethics. 2025 Apr 24;51(5):jme-2022-108781. doi: 10.1136/jme-2022-108781.
3
Neither carrots nor sticks? Challenges surrounding data sharing from the perspective of research funding agencies-A qualitative expert interview study.既无胡萝卜也无大棒?来自研究资助机构视角的数据共享所面临的挑战——一项定性专家访谈研究。
PLoS One. 2022 Sep 7;17(9):e0273259. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273259. eCollection 2022.
4
Many researchers say they'll share data - but don't.许多研究人员表示他们会分享数据,但实际上却没有这么做。
Nature. 2022 Jun;606(7916):853. doi: 10.1038/d41586-022-01692-1.
5
Many researchers were not compliant with their published data sharing statement: a mixed-methods study.许多研究人员未遵守其公布的数据共享声明:一项混合方法研究。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Oct;150:33-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.05.019. Epub 2022 May 30.
6
Open data and data sharing in articles about COVID-19 published in preprint servers medRxiv and bioRxiv.预印本服务器medRxiv和bioRxiv上发表的关于COVID-19文章中的开放数据和数据共享。
Scientometrics. 2022;127(5):2791-2802. doi: 10.1007/s11192-022-04346-1. Epub 2022 Mar 25.
7
NIH issues a seismic mandate: share data publicly.美国国立卫生研究院发布了一项重大指令:公开共享数据。
Nature. 2022 Feb;602(7898):558-559. doi: 10.1038/d41586-022-00402-1.
8
Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands.可疑研究行为、研究不端行为及其潜在解释因素的流行程度:荷兰学术研究人员的调查。
PLoS One. 2022 Feb 16;17(2):e0263023. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263023. eCollection 2022.
9
Reforms to improve reproducibility and quality must be coordinated across the research ecosystem: the view from the UKRN Local Network Leads.为了提高可重复性和质量,必须协调整个研究生态系统的改革:来自 UKRN 地方网络负责人的观点。
BMC Res Notes. 2022 Feb 15;15(1):58. doi: 10.1186/s13104-022-05949-w.
10
The Ethical Implications of Big Data Research in Public Health: "Big Data Ethics by Design" in the UK-REACH Study.大数据研究在公共卫生领域的伦理问题:英国-REACH 研究中的“大数据伦理设计”。
Ethics Hum Res. 2022 Jan;44(1):2-17. doi: 10.1002/eahr.500111.

促进数据共享:公共资助机构的道德义务。

Promoting Data Sharing: The Moral Obligations of Public Funding Agencies.

机构信息

Section for Translational Medical Ethics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.

出版信息

Sci Eng Ethics. 2024 Aug 6;30(4):35. doi: 10.1007/s11948-024-00491-3.

DOI:10.1007/s11948-024-00491-3
PMID:39105890
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11303567/
Abstract

Sharing research data has great potential to benefit science and society. However, data sharing is still not common practice. Since public research funding agencies have a particular impact on research and researchers, the question arises: Are public funding agencies morally obligated to promote data sharing? We argue from a research ethics perspective that public funding agencies have several pro tanto obligations requiring them to promote data sharing. However, there are also pro tanto obligations that speak against promoting data sharing in general as well as with regard to particular instruments of such promotion. We examine and weigh these obligations and conclude that all things considered funders ought to promote the sharing of data. Even the instrument of mandatory data sharing policies can be justified under certain conditions.

摘要

分享研究数据具有极大的造福科学和社会的潜力。然而,数据共享仍然不是常见的做法。由于公共研究资助机构对研究和研究人员有特殊的影响,因此出现了这样一个问题:公共资助机构在道德上是否有义务促进数据共享?我们从研究伦理的角度出发,认为公共资助机构有几项正当事由要求他们促进数据共享。然而,也有一些正当事由反对一般地促进数据共享,以及在特殊的促进手段方面。我们审查和权衡了这些义务,并得出结论,从各方面考虑,资助者应该促进数据的共享。即使是强制性数据共享政策的手段,在某些条件下也可以是合理的。