Frequency of receiving requested data for a systematic review and associated factors: A cross-sectional study

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to assess the frequency of receiving requested data for a systematic review and associated factors. We contacted the authors of studies in need of additional data via e-mail. The primary outcome was the success in receiving the requested data according to the time until receipt. We estimated the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for success in each variable compared to the reference category, with weighted Cox proportional hazards models using Stata (version 14.2). Out of 164 studies contacted, 110 replied (67.1%), and 51 sent requested data (31.1%). Median time to receive a response or withdraw contact was 36.0 days (interquartile range: 17.5, 142.5). Higher success ratio was observed in studies published as scientific papers (HR = 3.01, 95% CI = [1.18, 7.70]), in more than one publication (HR = 2.00, 95% CI = [1.14, 3.51]), and contacted by personal e-mail (HR = 2.85, 95% CI = [1.34, 6.07]). Three or more contact attempts led to lower success ratio (HR = 0.19, 95% CI = [0.11, 0.35]) than one or two. Requesting data for a systematic review was time-consuming and effective in three out of ten studies. Fewer contacts were more successful than insisting.

KEYWORDS:

• Systematic review
• electronic mail
• data sharing
• research integrity
• survey

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the studies’ authors for providing data or clarification on our request: Adriana Paula Silva, Alanderson A. Ramalho, Alessandra Doumid Borges Pretto, Alessandra Vitorino Naghettini, Alynne Christian Ribeiro Andaki, Ana Flavia Granville-Garcia, Ana Mayra A. de Oliveira, Ana Paula Carlos Cândido Mendes, Anna Christina Barreto, Anne Jardim-Botelho, Barbara H. Lourenço, Carla de Oliveira Bernardo, Cassiano Ricardo Rech, Cézane Priscila Reuter, Denise Petrucci Gigante, Deysianne Costa das Chagas, Diego Moura Tanajura, Doroteia Aparecida Höfelman, Elenir Rose Jardim Cury Pontes, Elma Izze da Silva Magalhães, Emil Kupek, Fabian Calixto Fraiz, Felipe S. Neves, Gabriella Bettiol Feltrin, Gerson Luis de Moraes Ferrari, Haroldo da Silva Ferreira, Ida Helena Carvalho Francescantonio Menezes, Jéssica Pedroso, Julia Khede Dourado Vila, Juliane Berria, Lana do Monte Paula Brasil, Larissa da Cunha Feio Costa, Leonardo Pozza Santos, Lucia Yassue Tutui Nogueira, Luciana Neri Nobre, Marcela de Franςa Verςosa, Marcos Britto Correa, Marcos Pascoal Pattussi, Maria Luiza Kraft, Maria Wany Louzada Strufaldi, Naruna Pereira Rocha, Nilton Rosini, Patrícia Casagrande Dias de Almeida, Paula Azevedo Aranha Crispim, Peter Katzmarzyk, Rosângela de Mattos Müller, Ruth Liane Henn, Samuel Carvalho Dumith, Silvia Diez Castilho, Sílvia Letícia Alexius, Silvia Nascimento de Freitas, Silvia Regina Dias Medici Saldiva, Simone Augusta Ribas, Suélen Henriques da Cruz, Valter Cordeiro Barbosa Filho, and Wendell Bila.

Dataset

The dataset of the research is available at https://osf.io/ukz3e/

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) under grant 4408652017-4. Galvao TF receives productivity scholarship from CNPq (grant 310238/2020-0).