ideasIdea
Journals check that data links actually work, and flag papers whose data vanish
Papers say 'data available on request' or link to files that no longer exist. Journals should verify data access at publication and periodically afterwards, and mark papers whose data have disappeared.
Studies of data availability statements find that most 'available on request' data cannot be obtained, and that links decay within a few years. Automated checks at submission (resolvable repository DOI, non-empty dataset, matching description) and annual re-checks, with an expression of concern for papers whose data become unavailable, would make data sharing real rather than nominal.
Hypothesis
Enforcement raises the proportion of oncology papers with actually retrievable data from under 30% to over 80% within three years at adopting journals.
Rationale
Compliance follows verification: sequencing data deposit is near-universal because journals check accession numbers.
What would test it
Implement at two journals; sample papers annually and attempt retrieval; compare with non-adopting journals.
Maturity
early clinical
Who has to act
policy
Cost to try
Small (under $1M)
Years to first evidence
1
Bottlenecks it attacks
- Preclinical results do not reproduce · Fewer than half of landmark cancer biology findings reproduce when someone else tries.
- Data silos · Records, scans, genomes and outcomes sit in separate systems that cannot talk. Every patient's experience is lost to the next.