...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Research Methodology >Social media attention and citations of published outputs from re-use of clinical trial data: a matched comparison with articles published in the same journals
【24h】

Social media attention and citations of published outputs from re-use of clinical trial data: a matched comparison with articles published in the same journals

机译：社交媒体关注和发表产出的引用从重复使用临床试验数据：与在同一期刊上发表的物品的匹配比较

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Data-sharing policies in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) should have an evaluation component. The main objective of this case–control study was to assess the impact of published re-uses of RCT data in terms of media attention (Altmetric) and citation rates. Re-uses of RCT data published up to December 2019 (cases) were searched for by two reviewers on 3 repositories (CSDR, YODA project, and Vivli) and matched to control papers published in the same journal. The Altmetric Attention Score (primary outcome), components of this score (e.g. mention of policy sources, media attention) and the total number of citations were compared between these two groups. 89 re-uses were identified: 48 (53.9%) secondary analyses, 34 (38.2%) meta-analyses, 4 (4.5%) methodological analyses and 3 (3.4%) re-analyses. The median (interquartile range) Altmetric Attention Scores were 5.9 (1.3—22.2) for re-use and 2.8 (0.3—12.3) for controls (p?=?0.14). No statistical difference was found on any of the components of in the Altmetric Attention Score. The median (interquartile range) numbers of citations were 3 (1—8) for reuses and 4 (1 – 11.5) for controls (p?=?0.30). Only 6/89 re-uses (6.7%) were cited in a policy source. Using all available re-uses of RCT data to date from major data repositories, we were not able to demonstrate that re-uses attracted more attention than a matched sample of studies published in the same journals. Small average differences are still possible, as the sample size was limited. However matching choices have some limitations so results should be interpreted very cautiously. Also, citations by policy sources for re-uses were rare.
机译：随机临床试验中的数据分享策略（RCT）应具有评估组分。本案例对照研究的主要目标是评估公布重新使用RCT数据在媒体关注（矿产）和引用率方面的影响。在2019年12月发布的RCT数据（案例）的RCT数据重新使用（CSDR，Yoda项目和Vivli）的两次审稿人被检测到，并匹配同一期刊上发布的控制文件。在这两组之间比较了矿产注意评分（主要结果），本分数的组成部分（例如，提及政策来源，媒体注意）和引用总数。鉴定了89次重新用途：48（53.9％）二次分析，34（38.2％）Meta-Analyzes，4（4.5％）方法分析和3（3.4％）再分析。重复使用的中位数（句子范围）矿产关注分数为5.9（1.3-22.2），控制器为2.8（0.3-12.3）（p？= 0.14）。在矿产关注评分中的任何组件上没有发现统计差异。中位数（句子范围）的引用数量为3（1-8），用于对照的重复使用和4（1 - 11.5）（P？= 0.30）。在政策来源中只引用了6/89重新使用（6.7％）。使用所有可用的重新使用RCT数据到达主要数据存储库，我们无法证明重新用途吸引了比同一期刊上发布的匹配样本更受关注。随着样品大小有限，仍有可能仍有较小的平均差异。然而，匹配的选择具有一些限制，因此结果应该非常谨慎地解释。此外，通过重新使用的政策来源的引文是罕见的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号