Institute of General Practice and Interprofessional Care, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Robert Bosch Center for Integrative Medicine and Health, Bosch Health Campus, Stuttgart, Germany.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Nov 1;103(44):e40259. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000040259.
Open science practices aim to increase transparency in research and increase research availability through open data, open access platforms, and public access. Due to the increasing popularity of complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine (CAIM) research, our study aims to explore current open science practices and perceived barriers among CAIM researchers in their own respective research articles. We conducted an international cross-sectional online survey that was sent to authors that published articles in MEDLINE-indexed journals categorized under the broad subject of "Complementary Therapies" or articles indexed under the MeSH term "Complementary Therapies." Articles were extracted to obtain the names and emails of all corresponding authors. Eight thousand seven hundred eighty-six researchers were emailed our survey, which included questions regarding participants' familiarity with open science practices, their open science practices, and perceived barriers to open science in CAIM with respect to participants' most recently published article. Basic descriptive statistics was generated based on the quantitative data. The survey was completed by 292 participants (3.32% response rate). Results indicate that the majority of participants were "very familiar" (n = 83, 31.68%) or "moderately familiar" (n = 83, 31.68%) with the concept of open science practices while creating their study. Open access publishing was the most familiar to participants, with 51.96% (n = 136) of survey respondents publishing with open access. Despite participants being familiar with other open science practices, the actual implementation of these practices was low. Common barriers participants experienced in implementing open science practices include not knowing where to share the study materials, where to share the data, or not knowing how to make a preprint. Although participants responded that they were familiar with the concept of open science practices, the actual implementation and uses of these practices were low. Barriers included a lack of overall knowledge about open science, and an overall lack of funding or institutional support. Future efforts should aim to explore how to implement methods to improve open science training for CAIM researchers.
开放科学实践旨在通过开放数据、开放获取平台和公众获取来提高研究的透明度并增加研究的可获得性。由于补充、替代和综合医学（CAIM）研究的日益普及，我们的研究旨在探索 CAIM 研究人员在其各自的研究文章中当前的开放科学实践和感知障碍。我们进行了一项国际横断面在线调查，该调查发送给在 MEDLINE 索引期刊中归类为“补充疗法”主题或在 MeSH 术语“补充疗法”下索引的文章的作者。从文章中提取出所有相应作者的姓名和电子邮件。向 8786 名研究人员发送了我们的调查电子邮件，其中包括参与者对开放科学实践的熟悉程度、他们的开放科学实践以及对 CAIM 中开放科学的感知障碍的问题，这些问题与参与者最近发表的文章有关。根据定量数据生成了基本描述性统计数据。共有 292 名参与者（3.32%的回复率）完成了调查。结果表明，大多数参与者在创建研究时对开放科学实践的概念非常熟悉（n=83，31.68%）或较为熟悉（n=83，31.68%）。开放获取出版是参与者最熟悉的，有 51.96%（n=136）的调查受访者以开放获取的方式出版。尽管参与者熟悉其他开放科学实践，但实际实施这些实践的比例很低。参与者在实施开放科学实践中遇到的常见障碍包括不知道在哪里分享研究材料、数据，或者不知道如何制作预印本。尽管参与者表示他们熟悉开放科学实践的概念，但这些实践的实际实施和使用比例很低。障碍包括对开放科学缺乏整体了解，以及缺乏整体资金或机构支持。未来的努力应旨在探索如何为 CAIM 研究人员实施改善开放科学培训的方法。
