Abstract
AbstractBackgroundOpen science practices aim to increase transparency in research and increase research availability through open data, open access platforms, and public access. Due to the increasing popularity of complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine (CAIM) research, our study aims to explore current open science practices and perceived barriers among CAIM researchers in their own respective research articles.MethodsWe conducted an international cross-sectional online survey that was sent to authors that published articles in MEDLINE-indexed journals categorized under the broad subject of “Complementary Therapies” or articles indexed under the MeSH term “Complementary Therapies”. Articles were extracted to obtain the names and emails of all corresponding authors. 8,786 researchers were emailed our survey, which included questions regarding participants’ familiarity with open science practices, their open science practices, and perceived barriers to open science in CAIM with respect to participants’ most recently published article. Basic descriptive statistics was generated based on the quantitative data.ResultsThe survey was completed by 292 participants (3.32% response rate). Results indicate that the majority of participants were “very familiar” (n = 83, 31.68%) or “moderately familiar” (n = 83, 31.68%) with the concept of open science practices while creating their study. Open access publishing was the most familiar to participants, with 51.96% (n = 136) of survey respondents publishing with open access. Despite participants being familiar with other open science practices, the actual implementation of these practices was low. Common barriers participants experienced in implementing open science practices include not knowing where to share the study materials, where to share the data, or not knowing how to make a preprint.ConclusionsAlthough participants responded that they were familiar with the concept of open science practices, the actual implementation and uses of these practices were low. Barriers included a lack of overall knowledge about open science, and an overall lack of funding or institutional support. Future efforts should aim to explore how to implement methods to improve open science training for CAIM researchers.
Publisher
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Reference37 articles.
1. National Research Council of Canada. Open science action plan: response to the Government of Canada Roadmap for Open Science [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2023 December 17]. Available from: https://nrc.canada.ca/en/corporate/planning-reporting/open-science-action-plan-response-government-canada-roadmap-open-science
2. Center for Open Science (OSF). Open Science Framework [Internet]. [cited 2023 December 17]. Available from: https://osf.io
3. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Open Science [Internet]. [cited 2023 December 17]. Available from: https://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/open-science.htm
4. G7 Expert Group on Open Science. Open Scholarship Policy Observatory [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2023 December 17]. Available from: https://ospolicyobservatory.uvic.ca/g7-working-group-open-science/
5. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2023 December 17]. Available from: https://en.unesco.org/science-sustainable-future/open-science/recommendation
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献