Up Front and Open? Shrouded in Secrecy? Or Somewhere in Between? A Meta-Research Systematic Review of Open Science Practices in Sport Medicine Research.

Abstract

<b>OBJECTIVE:</b> To investigate open science practices in research published in the top 5 sports medicine journals from May 1, 2022, and October 1, 2022. <b>DESIGN:</b> A meta-research systematic review. <b>LITERATURE SEARCH:</b> Open science practices were searched in MEDLINE. <b>STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA:</b> We included original scientific research published in one of the identified top 5 sports medicine journals in 2022 as ranked by Clarivate: (1) <i>British Journal of Sports Medicine</i>, (2) <i>Journal of Sport and Health Science</i>, (3) <i>American Journal of Sports Medicine</i>, (4) <i>Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise</i>, and (5) <i>Sports Medicine-Open</i>. Studies were excluded if they were systematic reviews, qualitative research, gray literature, or animal or cadaver models. <b>DATA SYNTHESIS:</b> Open science practices were extracted in accordance with the Transparency and Openness Promotion guidelines and patient and public involvement. <b>RESULTS:</b> Two hundred forty-three studies were included. The median number of open science practices in each study was 2, out of a maximum of 12 (range: 0-8; interquartile range: 2). Two hundred thirty-four studies (96%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 94%-99%) provided an author conflict-of-interest statement and 163 (67%, 95% CI: 62%-73%) reported funding. Twenty-one studies (9%, 95% CI: 5%-12%) provided open-access data. Fifty-four studies (22%, 95% CI: 17%-27%) included a data availability statement and 3 (1%, 95% CI: 0%-3%) made code available. Seventy-six studies (32%, 95% CI: 25%-37%) had transparent materials and 30 (12%, 95% CI: 8%-16%) used a reporting guideline. Twenty-eight studies (12%, 95% CI: 8%-16%) were preregistered. Six studies (3%, 95% CI: 1%-4%) published a protocol. Four studies (2%, 95% CI: 0%-3%) reported an analysis plan a priori. Seven studies (3%, 95% CI: 1%-5%) reported patient and public involvement. <b>CONCLUSION:</b> Open science practices in the sports medicine field are extremely limited. The least followed practices were sharing code, data, and analysis plans. <i>J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(12):1-13. Epub 20 October 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.12016</i>.