State of data sharing in plastic surgery: A cross-sectional analysis of journal practices and author adherence

Abstract

Introduction: Data sharing is crucial for transparency and reproducibility in research. We aim to evaluate data sharing practices in plastic surgery research, focusing on data sharing statements (DSS), identifying key trends, and assessing follow-through.Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the top seven plastic surgery journals, selecting original research articles published from 2018 to 2023. Data extraction was performed in a masked duplicate manner, capturing DSS presence, funding sources, study design, and publication year. Trends in DSS inclusion over time, study designs, and journals were analyzed. A thematic analysis was conducted on DSS content. Corresponding authors of studies that stated data was available upon request were contacted to assess follow-through.Results: Our review included 727 articles, with only 1.51% (11/727) including DSS. DSS prevalence varied, with the highest in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (4.42%, 5/113) and the lowest in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (0.43%, 1/235). Clinical trials were the most likely to include DSS (1.92%, 9/469), followed by cohort studies (1.16%, 2/173). Private funding and certain publishers were negatively associated with DSS inclusion, while journal impact factors showed a positive correlation. Responses from authors were not received, indicating a gap between stated intentions and actual practices.Conclusion: Data sharing practices in plastic surgery journals are inconsistent. Although DSS inclusion is encouraged, many studies still lack DSS, and the quality varies. Clearer mandates and enforcement are needed for effective data sharing