The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sharing Detailed Research Data Is Associated with Increased Citation Rate
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Sharing research data provides benefit to the general scientific community, but the benefit is less obvious for the investigator who makes his or her data available. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We examined the citation history of 85 cancer microarray clinical trial publications with respect to the availability of their data. The 48% of trials with publicly available microarray data received 85% of the aggregate citations. Publicly available data was significantly (p = 0.006) associated with a 69% increase in citations, independently of journal impact factor, date of publication, and author country of origin using linear regression. SIGNIFICANCE: This correlation between publicly available data and increased literature impact may further motivate investigators to share their detailed research data.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Data sharing is also associated with an increased number of citations.87 88”
From SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials (2025) · cites this paper as [87]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Journal articles with accompanying data may be cited more frequently [248,249].”
From Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0 (2020) · cites this paper as [248]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,893
Gene Expression Omnibus: NCBI gene expression and hybridization array data repository
Edgar, R. (2002) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/30.1.207 · Cited by 13,288
Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME)-toward standards for microarray data
Brazma, A., Hingamp, P., Quackenbush, J., Sherlock, G., Spellman, P., Stoeckert, C., Aach, J., Ansorge, W., Ball, C. A., Causton, H. C., et al. (2001) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1201-365 · Cited by 4,109
ONCOMINE: A Cancer Microarray Database and Integrated Data-Mining Platform
Rhodes, D. R., Yu, J., Sundaram, S. K., Deshpande, N., Varambally, R., Ghosh, D., Barrette, T. R., Pander, A., & Chinnaiyan, A. M. (2004) · Neoplasia · doi:10.1016/s1476-5586(04)80047-2 · Cited by 3,719
Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research
Seglen, P. O. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497 · Cited by 2,447
Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK)
McShane, L. M., Altman, D. G., Sauerbrei, W., Taube, S. E., Gion, M., & Clark, G. M. (2005) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/dji237 · Cited by 2,162
ArrayExpress--a public repository for microarray gene expression data at the EBI
Parkinson, H. (2004) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gki056 · Cited by 1,077
Citation Advantage of Open Access Articles
Eysenbach, G. (2006) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040157 · Cited by 829
Do Open-Access Articles Have a Greater Research Impact?
Antelman, K. (2004) · College & Research Libraries · doi:10.5860/crl.65.5.372 · Cited by 678
The Stanford Microarray Database
Sherlock, G. (2001) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/29.1.152 · Cited by 528
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0
Percie du Sert, N., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., Browne, W. J., Clark, A., Cuthill, I. C., Dirnagl, U., Emerson, M., et al. (2020) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000411 · Cited by 2,677
Nosek (2012) · doi:10.1177/1745691612459058 · Cited by 1,301
Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research
Chan, A.-W., Song, F., Vickers, A., Jefferson, T., Dickersin, K., Gøtzsche, P. C., Krumholz, H. M., Ghersi, D., & van der Worp, H. B. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62296-5 · Cited by 887
Big data and the future of ecology
Hampton, S. E., Strasser, C. A., Tewksbury, J. J., Gram, W. K., Budden, A. E., Batcheller, A. L., Duke, C. S., & Porter, J. H. (2013) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/120103 · Cited by 930
Factors Affecting Number of Citations: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature
Tahamtan, I., Safipour Afshar, A., & Ahamdzadeh, K. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1889-2 · Cited by 912
Metadata
- Authors
- Piwowar, H. A., Day, R. S., & Fridsma, D. B.
- Affiliations
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Corresponding author
- Piwowar, Heather A.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2007-03-21
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- e308
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC1817752
- OpenAlex
- W2046766973
- Cited by
- 881
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 71 · 2021: 71 · 2020: 73 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 68 · 2017: 54 · 2016: 61 · 2015: 64 · 2014: 47 · 2013: 74 · 2012: 40
- FWCI
- 50.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- D-Scholarship@Pitt (University of Pittsburgh) (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- U.S. National Library of Medicine (T15LM007059)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Keywords
- research data sharing, data availability, citation impact, public data, journal impact factor
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Trials as Topic, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Neoplasms, Periodicals as Topic, Publications, Regression Analysis, Internet, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Information Dissemination, Biomedical Research, Journal Impact Factor
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
