Data sharing and reuse in clinical research: Are we there yet? A cross-sectional study on progress, challenges and opportunities in LMICs

Data sharing holds promise to accelerate innovative discoveries through artificial intelligence (AI) and traditional analytics. However, it remains unclear whether these prospects translate into tangible benefits in improving health care and scientific progress. In this cross-sectional study, we investigate current data reuse practices and explore ways to enhance the use of existing data in clinical research, focusing on low- and middle-income countries. 643 clinical researchers and data professionals participated in the study. 55.5% analysed clinical trial data. 75.3% of data users analysed data from observational studies obtained mainly through personal requests or downloads from publicly available sources. Data was mainly used to influence the design of new studies or in pooled and individual patient-level data meta-analyses. Key benefits realised were career progression and academic qualification, with more gains reported by users affiliated with high-income and upper-middle-income countries (p = 0.046, chi = 8.0). Scientific progress through publications and collaborations was associated with gender (p = 0.012, chi = 10.9), with males more likely to contribute. Benefits to the public although minimal, were associated with career seniority (p = 0.001, chi = 18.8), with works by senior researchers being more likely to influence health policy or treatment guidelines. Although 54% of the respondents accessed at least 3 datasets in the past 5 years, 79.4% of data users encountered difficulty finding relevant data for planned analyses. Researchers affiliated with low and middle income institutions reported more difficulty interpreting data (p = 0.012, chi = 25.7), while challenges with language were regionally influenced (p = 0.000, chi = 51.3) and more commonly reported by researchers in Latin America and South and East Asia institutions. While the utilisation of shared data is lower than expected, focused efforts to enrich existing data with extensive metadata using standard terminologies can enhance data findability. Investment in training programmes, building professional networks, and mentorship in data science may improve the quality of data generated and increase researchers' ability to use existing datasets.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLOS Global Public Health
Published
2024-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003392
Citations
9
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.08

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Data sharing and reuse in clinical research: Are we there yet? A cross-sectional study on progress, challenges and opportunities in LMICs

Dung Nguyễn Thị Phương, Keitcheya Chotthanawathit, Mavuto Mukaka, Naomi Waithira et al.
9 citations
PLOS Global Public Health
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
1.08
article

Data sharing and reuse in clinical research: Are we there yet? A cross-sectional study on progress, challenges and opportunities in LMICs

Dung Nguyễn Thị Phương, Keitcheya Chotthanawathit, Mavuto Mukaka, Naomi Waithira, Phaik Yeong Cheah, Evelyne Kestelyn, Trudie Lang, Anne Osterrieder, Hoa Nguyen Thanh
article en
9 citations

Abstract

Data sharing holds promise to accelerate innovative discoveries through artificial intelligence (AI) and traditional analytics. However, it remains unclear whether these prospects translate into tangible benefits in improving health care and scientific progress. In this cross-sectional study, we investigate current data reuse practices and explore ways to enhance the use of existing data in clinical research, focusing on low- and middle-income countries. 643 clinical researchers and data professionals participated in the study. 55.5% analysed clinical trial data. 75.3% of data users analysed data from observational studies obtained mainly through personal requests or downloads from publicly available sources. Data was mainly used to influence the design of new studies or in pooled and individual patient-level data meta-analyses. Key benefits realised were career progression and academic qualification, with more gains reported by users affiliated with high-income and upper-middle-income countries (p = 0.046, chi = 8.0). Scientific progress through publications and collaborations was associated with gender (p = 0.012, chi = 10.9), with males more likely to contribute. Benefits to the public although minimal, were associated with career seniority (p = 0.001, chi = 18.8), with works by senior researchers being more likely to influence health policy or treatment guidelines. Although 54% of the respondents accessed at least 3 datasets in the past 5 years, 79.4% of data users encountered difficulty finding relevant data for planned analyses. Researchers affiliated with low and middle income institutions reported more difficulty interpreting data (p = 0.012, chi = 25.7), while challenges with language were regionally influenced (p = 0.000, chi = 51.3) and more commonly reported by researchers in Latin America and South and East Asia institutions. While the utilisation of shared data is lower than expected, focused efforts to enrich existing data with extensive metadata using standard terminologies can enhance data findability. Investment in training programmes, building professional networks, and mentorship in data science may improve the quality of data generated and increase researchers' ability to use existing datasets.

PLOS Global Public HealthVol. 4(11)
University of Oxford (GB), Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (TH), Health Data Research UK (GB), Oxford University Clinical Research Unit (VN)
Wellcome Trust, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Medical Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
1.08
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.