Data sharing statements in five high-impact anesthesiology journals (2020–2023): a cross-sectional study
Authors' conclusion
We found that DSS were underused in leading anesthesiology journals.
Study context
- Population
- Research articles published in five high-impact anesthesiology journals, 2020–2023included articles
- Participants
- 1,123 articles
- Outcome
- Presence, quality and accessibility of data sharing statements (DSS)
Methodological detailsArticles screened in duplicate (Rayyan); data extracted with a structured Google Form, Large language model (ChatGPT, GPT-4) used for exploratory thematic development of data sharing statements (DSS), with manual validation
- Articles screened in duplicate (Rayyan); data extracted with a structured Google Form
- Large language model (ChatGPT, GPT-4) used for exploratory thematic development of DSS, with manual validation
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
DSS prevalence
Anaesthesia, Critical Care & Pain Medicine: articles with DSS in 2020
15%
4/26
Anaesthesia, Critical Care & Pain Medicine: articles with DSS in 2023
30%
9/30
Anesthesia & Analgesia: DSS prevalence
below 8%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Factors associated with DSS inclusion
- Government funding, more likely to include DSS (β)
- 0.734, P = 0.047
- Higher journal impact factor, negatively associated with DSS inclusion (β)
- −0.298, P = 0.008
DSS type (thematic analysis)
- "Conditional Data Availability", most frequent DSS type
- 74%
Author responses to data requests
- Contacted authors who responded
- 28%
- Contacted authors who agreed to share data for replication
- 14%
Original publication
Data sharing statements in five high-impact anesthesiology journals (2020–2023): a cross-sectional study. Can J Anaesth. Published 10 April 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →