Transparency of COVID-19-Related Research in Dental Journals
Open accessAbstract
Objective: We aimed to assess the adherence to transparency practices (data availability, code availability, statements of protocol registration and conflicts of interest and funding disclosures) and FAIRness (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) of shared data from open access COVID-19-related articles published in dental journals available from the Europe PubMed Central (PMC) database. Methods: We searched and exported all COVID-19-related open-access articles from PubMed-indexed dental journals available in the Europe PMC database in 2020 and 2021. We detected transparency indicators with a validated and automated tool developed to extract the indicators from the downloaded articles. Basic journal- and article-related information was retrieved from the PMC database. Then, from those which had shared data, we assessed their accordance with FAIR data principles using the F-UJI online tool ( f-uji.net ). Results: Of 650 available articles published in 59 dental journals, 74% provided conflicts of interest disclosure and 40% funding disclosure and 4% were preregistered. One study shared raw data (0.15%) and no study shared code. Transparent practices were more common in articles published in journals with higher impact factors, and in 2020 than in 2021. Adherence to the FAIR principles in the only paper that shared data was moderate. Conclusion: While the majority of the papers had a COI disclosure, the prevalence of the other transparency practices was far from the acceptable level. A much stronger commitment to open science practices, particularly to preregistration, data and code sharing, is needed from all stakeholders.
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
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?
Protocol registration is applicable to and recommended for all studies and is supported by various platforms, such as the Open Science Framework.
“However, protocol registration is applicable to and recommended for all studies and is supported by various platforms, such as the Open Science Framework [3, 29, 35–37].”
From Assessing transparency practices in dental randomized controlled trials (2024) · cites this paper as [29]
The Discussion (page not provided) says that almost all studies could and should be preregistered and that platforms including the Open Science Framework support registration of any type of research study. The claim's unqualified “all studies” is broader than the paper's “almost all studies.” (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredCompared to dental research involving other types of studies, this analysis revealed the highest value for reporting of protocol registration (50.36%).
“However, compared to dental research involving other types of studies [29, 34], our analysis revealed the highest value for the reporting of protocol registration (50.36%).”
From Assessing transparency practices in dental randomized controlled trials (2024) · cites this paper as [29]
The findings align with previous biomedical and dental research, which reported the presence of more articles with statement of conflict of interest and funding than data and code sharing and protocol registration.
“Our findings align with previous biomedical and dental research, which reported the presence of more articles with statement of conflict of interest and funding than data and code sharing and protocol registration [27–30].”
From Assessing transparency practices in dental randomized controlled trials (2024) · cites this paper as [29]
Data and code sharing has been the least reported aspect in many studies.
“and data and code sharing has been the least reported aspect in many studies [25–30, 41].”
From Assessing transparency practices in dental randomized controlled trials (2024) · cites this paper as [29]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship
Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., Blomberg, N., Boiten, J.-W., da Silva Santos, L. B., Bourne, P. E., et al. (2016) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18 · Cited by 18,423 · cited 2× · see citing works
“We encourage oral health researchers to share all their data and codes in adherence to FAIR principles [14] in order to increase the transparency, accessibility, and replicability of their research.”
MethodWynants, L., Van Calster, B., Bonten, M. M., Collins, G. S., Debray, T. P., De Vos, M., Haller, M. C., Heinze, G., Moons, K. G., Riley, R. D., et al. (2020) · doi:10.1101/2020.03.24.20041020 · Cited by 3,070 · see citing works
High expression of ACE2 receptor of 2019-nCoV on the epithelial cells of oral mucosa
Xu, H., Zhong, L., Deng, J., Peng, J., Dan, H., Zeng, X., Li, T., & Chen, Q. (2020) · International Journal of Oral Science · doi:10.1038/s41368-020-0074-x · Cited by 2,838 · see citing works
The preregistration revolution
Nosek, B. A., Ebersole, C. R., DeHaven, A. C., & Mellor, D. T. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1708274114 · Cited by 1,998 · see citing works
The (ir)rational consideration of the cost of science in transition economies
Vuong, Q. (2017) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-017-0281-4 · Cited by 1,360 · see citing works
Collider bias undermines our understanding of COVID-19 disease risk and severity
Griffith, G. J., Morris, T. T., Tudball, M. J., Herbert, A., Mancano, G., Pike, L., Sharp, G. C., Sterne, J., Palmer, T. M., Davey Smith, G., et al. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-19478-2 · Cited by 826 · see citing works
Als-Nielsen, B., Chen, W., Gluud, C., & Kjaergard, L. L. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.290.7.921 · Cited by 746 · see citing works
Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond
Allen, C., & Mehler, D. M. A. (2019) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000246 · Cited by 608 · see citing works
The prevalence of statistical reporting errors in psychology (1985–2013)
Nuijten, M. B., Hartgerink, C. H. J., van Assen, M. A. L. M., Epskamp, S., & Wicherts, J. M. (2016) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0664-2 · Cited by 510 · see citing works
Vuong, Q., Le, T.-T., La, V., Huyền, N. T. T., Ho, M., Khuc, Q. V., & Nguyen, M. (2022) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-022-01034-6 · Cited by 339 · see citing works
Glasziou, P., Sanders, S., & Hoffmann, T. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.m1847 · Cited by 330 · see citing works
Bero, L. A. (2005) · Public Health Reports · doi:10.1177/003335490512000215 · Cited by 229 · see citing works
Assessment of transparency indicators across the biomedical literature: How open is open?
Serghiou, S., Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D. G., Boyack, K. W., Riedel, N., Wallach, J. D., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2021) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001107 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Reproducibility and Research Integrity
Resnik, D. B., & Shamoo, A. E. (2016) · Accountability in Research · doi:10.1080/08989621.2016.1257387 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Methodology over metrics: current scientific standards are a disservice to patients and society
Van Calster, B., Wynants, L., Riley, R. D., van Smeden, M., & Collins, G. S. (2021) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.05.018 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Data sharing in the era of COVID-19
Cosgriff, C. V., Ebner, D. K., & Celi, L. A. (2020) · The Lancet Digital Health · doi:10.1016/s2589-7500(20)30082-0 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Characteristics of funding of clinical trials: cross-sectional survey and proposed guidance
Hakoum, M. B., Jouni, N., Abou-Jaoude, E. A., Hasbani, D. J., Abou-Jaoude, E. A., Lopes, L. C., Khaldieh, M., Hammoud, M. Z., Al‐Gibbawi, M., Anouti, S., et al. (2017) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015997 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
The sharing of research data facing the COVID-19 pandemic
Lucas-Domínguez, R., Alonso‐Arroyo, A., Vidal‐Infer, A., & Aleixandre‐Benavent, R. (2021) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-021-03971-6 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Resnik, D. B., Konecny, B., & Kissling, G. E. (2016) · Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · doi:10.1097/jom.0000000000000910 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Conflicts of interest: an invisible force shaping health systems and policies
Rahman-Shepherd, A., Balasubramaniam, P., Gautham, M., et al. (2021) · The Lancet Global Health · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(21)00202-3 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Reporting of conflict of interest and sponsorship in dental journals
Faggion, C. M., Pandis, N., de Cardoso, G. C., Rodolfo, B., Morel, L. L., & Moraes, R. R. (2020) · Journal of Dentistry · doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103452 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
F-UJI - An Automated FAIR Data Assessment Tool
Devaraju, A., & Huber, R. (2020) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4063719 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Clinical Trial Data Sharing for COVID-19–Related Research
Dron, L., Dillman, A., Zoratti, M. J., Häggström, J., Mills, E. J., & Park, J. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/26718 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Kearns, C. E., & Bero, L. A. (2019) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31277-2 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Conflicts of interest among the UK government’s covid-19 advisers
Thacker, P. D. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.m4716 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Anticipating consequences of sharing raw data and code and of awarding badges for sharing
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.04.015 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Science After Covid-19: Faster, Better, Stronger?
Schwab, S., & Held, L. (2020) · Significance · doi:10.1111/1740-9713.01415 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Perceptions About Conflicts of Interest: An Ontario Survey of Dentists’ Opinions
Schwartz, B. N., Banting, D. W., & Stitt, L. (2007) · Journal of Dental Education · doi:10.1002/j.0022-0337.2007.71.12.tb04430.x · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Conflict of Interest Reporting in Dentistry Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review
Beyari, M. M., Hak, A., Li, C. S., & Lamfon, H. A. (2014) · Journal of Evidence Based Dental Practice · doi:10.1016/j.jebdp.2014.06.002 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Association of COVID-19-imposed lockdown and online searches for toothache in Iran
Sofi‐Mahmudi, A., Shamsoddin, E., Ghasemi, P., Bahar, A. M., Azad, M. S., & Sadeghi, G. (2021) · BMC Oral Health · doi:10.1186/s12903-021-01428-z · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Self-citationGandhi, G., Latha, T., Upadhya, N. P., & Carnelio, S. (2021) · International Journal of Dental Hygiene · doi:10.1111/idh.12555 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Transparency in surgical randomized clinical trials: cross-sectional observational study
Helliwell, J. A., Shelton, B., Mahmood, H., Blanco‐Colino, R., Fitzgerald, J. E. F., Harrison, E. M., Bhangu, A. A., & Chapman, S. J. (2020) · BJS Open · doi:10.1002/bjs5.50333 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Fixing flaws in science must be professionalized
Goldacre, B. M., & Brown, T. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.06.018 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [12]Dentistry[st] AND currentlyindexed[All]. Available online at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog/?term=Dentistry%5Bst%5D+AND+currentlyindexed%5BAll%5D (accessed January 6, 2022).
- [18]Wickham H ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag (2016). Available online at: https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org (accessed January 28, 2022).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hamilton, D. G., Hong, K., Fraser, H., Rowhani-Farid, A., Fidler, F., & Page, M. J. (2023) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-075767 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Research transparency in dental research: A programmatic analysis
Raittio, E., Sofi‐Mahmudi, A., & Uribe, S. E. (2023) · European Journal of Oral Sciences · doi:10.1111/eos.12908 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Self-citationAssessing transparency practices in dental randomized controlled trials
Prado, M. C., Dotto, L., Agostini, B., & Sarkis-Onofre, R. (2024) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-024-02316-0 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Sofi-Mahmudi, A., & Raittio, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Eastern Finland (FI)
- ORCID
- Raittio, Eero
- Venue
- Frontiers in Oral Health
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2022-04-06
- Volume
- 3
- Pages
- 871033-871033
- ISSN
- 2673-4842 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9019132
- OpenAlex
- W4226207294
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4
- FWCI
- 2.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Oral Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Keywords
- research transparency, COVID-19 research, dental journals, FAIR principles, data sharing, code sharing, conflict of interest disclosure, funding disclosure, preregistration, open science, open access publications, 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