Terry Robert F, Littler Katherine, Olliaro Piero L
Research Policy, TDR - The Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases, Geneva, 1211, Switzerland.
Policy Unit, Wellcome Trust, London, UK.
F1000Res. 2018 Oct 15;7:1641. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.16523.2. eCollection 2018.
Recent public health emergencies with outbreaks of influenza, Ebola and Zika revealed that the mechanisms for sharing research data are neither being used, or adequate for the purpose, particularly where data needs to be shared rapidly. A review of research papers, including completed clinical trials related to priority pathogens, found only 31% (98 out of 319 published papers, excluding case studies) provided access to all the data underlying the paper - 65% of these papers give no information on how to find or access the data. Only two clinical trials out of 58 on interventions for WHO priority pathogens provided any link in their registry entry to the background data. Interviews with researchers revealed a reluctance to share data included a lack of confidence in the utility of the data; an absence of academic-incentives for rapid dissemination that prevents subsequent publication and a disconnect between those who are collecting the data and those who wish to use it quickly. The role of the funders of research needs to change to address this. Funders need to engage early with the researchers and related stakeholders to understand their concerns and work harder to define the more explicitly the benefits to all stakeholders. Secondly, there needs to be a direct benefit to sharing data that is directly relevant to those people that collect and curate the data. Thirdly more work needs to be done to realise the intent of making data sharing resources more equitable, ethical and efficient. Finally, a checklist of the issues that need to be addressed when designing new or revising existing data sharing resources should be created. This checklist would highlight the technical, cultural and ethical issues that need to be considered and point to examples of emerging good practice that can be used to address them.
近期流感、埃博拉和寨卡疫情等突发公共卫生事件表明,研究数据共享机制要么未得到运用,要么不足以满足需求,尤其是在需要快速共享数据的情况下。一项对研究论文的审查,包括与重点病原体相关的已完成临床试验,发现只有31%(319篇已发表论文中的98篇,不包括案例研究)提供了对论文所有基础数据的访问权限——其中65%的论文未提供有关如何查找或访问数据的信息。在58项针对世卫组织重点病原体干预措施的临床试验中,只有两项在其注册条目中提供了与背景数据的任何链接。对研究人员的访谈显示,他们不愿共享数据的原因包括对数据效用缺乏信心;缺乏促进快速传播从而妨碍后续发表的学术激励措施;以及数据收集者和希望快速使用数据者之间存在脱节。研究资助者的角色需要改变以解决这一问题。资助者需要尽早与研究人员及相关利益攸关方接触,了解他们的关切,并更加努力地更明确地界定对所有利益攸关方的益处。其次,共享数据需要对数据收集和整理者有直接的好处。第三,需要做更多工作以实现使数据共享资源更加公平、符合伦理和高效的目标。最后,应该创建一份在设计新的数据共享资源或修订现有资源时需要解决的问题清单。这份清单将突出需要考虑的技术、文化和伦理问题,并指出可用于解决这些问题的新兴良好做法示例。