Objectives: To describe the current attitudes, behaviors, and perceived disciplinary norms related to open science practices among full-time pharmacy faculty in the US and to examine differences in attitudes and behaviors across pharmacy disciplines. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, the Center for Open Science's Open Scholarship Survey modules on data sharing, code sharing, materials sharing, preregistration, preprints, and open access publishing were administered to a random sample of 3,200 faculty from the AACP Roster of Pharmacy Faculty as of February 2022. Individuals with at least a 0.8 full-time equivalent faculty appointment in pharmacy practice or one of the pharmaceutical sciences were eligible to participate. Results: Responses were obtained from 663 faculty (502 complete; 161 partial). The most positive attitudes were for open access publishing (overall mean [SD]: 4.1 [0.9]) with the lowest attitudes for study preregistration (3.2 [0.9]) and posting preprints (3.1 [1.1]). Statistically significant differences in attitudes across pharmacy disciplines were identified for data sharing, code sharing, and study preregistration. The most commonly reported open science practice was open access publishing (mean [SD], 27.7% [29.1%]). Study preregistration was the least common (mean [SD], 1.7% [7.0%]). After accounting for respondent and institutional characteristics, differences in open science behaviors were noted across pharmacy disciplines. Conclusion: This study provides a baseline assessment of faculty attitudes towards and engagement in open science practices among US pharmacy faculty. Given the relatively low frequency with which open science practices were reported, there is considerable room for improvement in the uptake of open science practices.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

https://osf.io/68rvy

This study did not receive any external funding.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Institutional Review Board of Midwestern University (Illinois Campus) gave ethical approval for this work (File Number 22011).

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

All data produced will available online at the project's Open Science Framework (OSF) page after acceptance of the paper.

https://osf.io/udywr/