Open science practices among authors published in complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine journals: An international, cross-sectional survey

被引:0
作者
Ng, Jeremy Y. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Lin, Brenda X. [1 ,2 ]
Kreuder, Liliane [1 ,2 ]
Cramer, Holger [1 ,2 ]
Moher, David [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Tubingen, Inst Gen Practice & Interprofess Care, Osianderstr 5, D-72076 Tubingen, Germany
[2] Robert Bosch Ctr Integrat Med & Hlth, Bosch Hlth Campus, Stuttgart, Germany
[3] Ottawa Hosp, Ctr Journalol, Ottawa Methods Ctr, Res Inst, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Ottawa, Sch Epidemiol & Publ Hlth, Ottawa, ON, Canada
关键词
barriers; complementary and alternative medicine; integrative medicine; open science; open science practices;
D O I
10.1097/MD.0000000000040259
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 38 条
  • [1] Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond
    Allen, Christopher
    Mehler, David M. A.
    [J]. PLOS BIOLOGY, 2019, 17 (05)
  • [2] [Anonymous], Open Science Framework
  • [3] Behavioural Addiction Open Definition 2.0using the Open Science Framework for collaborative and transparent theoretical development
    Billieux, Joel
    van Rooij, Antonius J.
    Heeren, Alexandre
    Schimmenti, Adriano
    Maurage, Pierre
    Edman, Johan
    Blaszczynski, Alexander
    Khazaal, Yasser
    Kardefelt-Winther, Daniel
    [J]. ADDICTION, 2017, 112 (10) : 1723 - 1724
  • [4] Science as a public enterprise: the case for open data
    Boulton, Geoffrey
    Rawlins, Michael
    Vallance, Patrick
    Walport, Mark
    [J]. LANCET, 2011, 377 (9778) : 1633 - 1635
  • [5] Centre for Journalology, 2022, Welcome to the centre for journalology
  • [6] Christensen G., 2020, Open Science Practices are on the Rise: The State of Social Science (3S) Survey, DOI 10.31222/osf.io/5rksu
  • [7] Open Science: Open Data, Open Models, ...and Open Publications?
    Clark, Martyn P.
    Luce, Charles H.
    AghaKouchak, Amir
    Berghuijs, Wouter
    David, Cedric H.
    Duan, Qingyun
    Ge, Shemin
    van Meerveld, Ilja
    Zheng, Chunmiao
    Parlange, Marc B.
    Tyler, Scott W.
    [J]. WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2021, 57 (04)
  • [8] Cardiology researchers' practices and perceived barriers to open science: an international survey
    Cobey, Kelly D.
    Alayche, Mohsen
    Saba, Sara
    Barnes, Nana Yaa
    Ebrahimzadeh, Sanam
    Alarcon, Emilio
    Hibbert, Benjamin
    Moher, David
    [J]. OPEN HEART, 2024, 11 (01):
  • [9] Cohen M., 2005, Evid-Based Integr Med, V2, P117
  • [10] Ebrahimzadeh S., 2023, F100Research, V12, P1375