Clinical trials in radiology and data sharing: results from a survey of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) research committee



To determine the current situation and future directions of clinical trials and data sharing in radiology.


This survey was conducted between July and September 2018 among European heads of imaging departments and speakers at the Clinical Trials in Radiology sessions at ECR 2015–2018. The survey was approved by the ESR research committee, was administered online, and chi-square tests were used.


The overall response rate was 29% (132/460). Responses were received from institutions in 29 countries. These institutions reported having conducted 429 trials, leading to 332 publications, of which 43% were first and 44% were last authorships by those institutions. For future trials, 98% of respondents (93/95) said they would be interested in sharing data, although only 34% had shared data already (23/68, p < 0.001). The major barriers to data sharing were data protection (78%, 74/95), ethical issues (49%, 47/95), and the lack of a data sharing platform (49%, 47/95). Of the respondents, 89% believed a platform would facilitate data sharing (85/95 vs. 10/95 did not, p < 0.001) and should offer easy data uploading (74%, 70/95), data safety (66%, 63/95), easy communication between providers and re-users (62%, 59/95), and data access policies (56%, 53/95).


A considerable number of imaging trials are being performed and published by radiologists in Europe whilst data sharing is hardly taking place, despite great interest. This is most likely due to data protection and ethical issues, as well as the absence of a data sharing platform.

Key Points

• Radiologists have performed a considerable number of more than 400 imaging trials in the last 5 years.

• Although only 34% of institutions had shared trial data already, 98% are interested in doing so.

• Major data sharing barriers are ethics, data protection, and the absence of a sharing platform.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6



European Congress of Radiology


European Institute for Biomedical Imaging Research


European Society of Radiology


General Data Protection Regulation


  1. 1.

    Sardanelli F, Hunink MG, Gilbert FJ, Di Leo G, Krestin GP (2010) Evidence-based radiology: why and how? Eur Radiol 20:1–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Kruskal JB, Larson DB (2018) Strategies for radiology to thrive in the value era. Radiology 289:3–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Taichman DB, Sahni P, Pinborg A et al (2017) Data sharing statements for clinical trials. BMJ 357:j2372

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Sardanelli F, Ali M, Hunink MG, Houssami N, Sconfienza LM, Di Leo G (2018) To share or not to share? Expected pros and cons of data sharing in radiological research. Eur Radiol 28:2328–2335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Naudet F, Sakarovitch C, Janiaud P et al (2018) Data sharing and reanalysis of randomized controlled trials in leading biomedical journals with a full data sharing policy: survey of studies published in the BMJ and PLOS medicine. BMJ 360:k400

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    EOSC (2018) European Open Science Cloud Pilot Project. Available via Accessed Nov 14 2018

  7. 7.

    Tricoci P, Allen JM, Kramer JM, Califf RM, Smith SC Jr (2009) Scientific evidence underlying the ACC/AHA clinical practice guidelines. JAMA 301:831–841

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Baker M (2016) 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature 533:452–454

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Attyé A (2018) Data sharing improves scientific publication: example of the “hydrops initiative”. Eur Radiol.

  10. 10.

    European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2015). ESR position paper on imaging biobanks. Insights Imaging 6:403–410

  11. 11.

    Haug CJ (2018) Turning the tables - the new European General Data Protection Regulation. N Engl J Med.

  12. 12.

    European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2017). The new EU General Data Protection Regulation: what the radiologist should know. Insights Imaging 8:295–299

  13. 13.

    Hricak H (2018) 2016 new horizons lecture: beyond imaging-radiology of tomorrow. Radiology 286:764–775

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Pesapane F, Codari M, Sardanelli F (2018) Artificial intelligence in medical imaging: threat or opportunity? Radiologists again at the forefront of innovation in medicine. Eur Radiol Exp 2:35

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Warren E (2016) Strengthening research through data sharing. N Engl J Med 375:401–403

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Bierer BE, Li R, Barnes M, Sim I (2016) A global, neutral platform for sharing trial data. N Engl J Med 374:2411–2413

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Mello MM, Lieou V, Goodman SN (2018) Clinical trial participants’ views of the risks and benefits of data sharing. N Engl J Med 378:2202–2211

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Haug CJ (2017) Whose data are they anyway? Can a patient perspective advance the data-sharing debate? N Engl J Med 376:2203–2205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IJ et al (2016) The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data 3:160018

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Ohmann C, Banzi R, Canham S et al (2017) Sharing and reuse of individual participant data from clinical trials: principles and recommendations. BMJ Open 7:e018647

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Nasser M, Clarke M, Chalmers I et al (2017) What are funders doing to minimise waste in research? Lancet 389:1006–1007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Leung KY, van der Lijn F, Vrooman HA, Sturkenboom MC, Niessen WJ (2015) IT infrastructure to support the secondary use of routinely acquired clinical imaging data for research. Neuroinformatics 13:65–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Matlock M, Schimke N, Kong L, Macke S, Hale J (2012) Systematic redaction for neuroimage data. Int J Comput Models Algorithms Med 3(2).

Download references


The abstract for this paper was accepted for the Clinical Trials in Radiology (CTiR) session of the European Congress of Radiology in Vienna 2019.


The study received no funding.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc Dewey.

Ethics declarations


The scientific guarantor of this publication is Prof. Dr. Marc Dewey.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relevant relationships with companies and no conflicts of interest.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed consent

Not required for this anonymised survey.

Ethical approval

Not required for this anonymised survey.


• Prospective

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material


(PDF 180 kb)


(PDF 518 kb)


(PDF 512 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bosserdt, M., Hamm, B. & Dewey, M. Clinical trials in radiology and data sharing: results from a survey of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) research committee. Eur Radiol 29, 4794–4802 (2019).

Download citation


  • Randomized controlled trial
  • Clinical trial
  • Diagnostic imaging
  • Information dissemination
  • Surveys and questionnaires