Can I cite a report that says it "should not be used or relied upon by anyone else"?

Question

I have found a report with a lot of useful data in it. It is very easy to get ahold of; the organization that ordered it actively promotes it on their website. I would like to cite it. However, the report includes a "General use restriction", stating:

This report is prepared solely for the use of the [organization]. This report is not intended to and should not be used or relied upon by anyone else and we accept no duty of care to any other person or entity. The report has been prepared for the purpose of estimating the [useful data] in [country]. You should not refer to or use our name or the advice for any other purpose.

Does this actually mean that I cannot use the data at all? And/or is the best approach to cite that specific data, to instead cite the organisation's summary of it, even if that is in a summary report, or even just on a webpage?

In the latter case, it is also unclear to me if I should include the actual report in the reference or not.

I have reached out to the company (no individual authors are listed). Regarding quality, the only thing I can say is that the organization that ordered it seems very happy about it, as seems several other advocacy groups who have cross-links the report.

Answer 1

Does this actually mean that I cannot use the data at all? And/or is the best approach to cite that specific data, to instead cite the organisation's summary of it, even if that is in a summary report, or even just on a webpage?

You have reached out to the authors, but not heard back. I think you have answered your own question with: cite the organisation's summary of it, even if that is in a summary report, or even just on a webpage. This will allow you to acknowledge the existence of the work, but not use the data as part of your work.

If I were doing research on a topic covered in a situation like this, I would likely cite ongoing research for the topic in either the Introduction or Discussion. I would write something like:

[My really important research topic] is important to [country] who [commissioned/requested/funded] research on the topic. [A grey paper/report/preliminary data/summary] has been posted to [the organization's webpage/other public venue (cite here in appropriate style)], but are not publicly [citable/available].

Depending upon the venue, you might even mention that you reached out to the authors, but they did not respond. I have seen this done when people try to recreate other studies, but the data is only available upon request and authors do not share their data.

Lastly, I have seen examples of these types of disclaimers with completion reports such as those for US FDA studies (sorry, no link to a database) and NGOs such as the The Great Lakes Fisheries Commission who publishes completions reports and abstracts with a disclaimer such as

ABSTRACT NOT FOR CITATION WITHOUT AUTHOR PERMISSION.

Answer 2

In medical settings a grey area of activity is the quality improvement (QI) project. One of the hallmarks of a QI project according to HHS is

... quality improvement activities do not satisfy the definition of “research” under 45 CFR 46.102(d), which is “…a systematic investigation, including research development, testing and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge…”

As a QI project does not contribute to generalizable knowledge, our research support office requires all publications of QI projects to include a similar disclaimer that states the purpose of the QI project and that the results should not be used for anything but that purpose.

Ideally,the limitations of a QI project should make it so no one wants to generalize based on it, but in reality some researchers use QI projects to conduct research without IRB requirements. There is a lot of grey area in between where the methods, data and analysis may all be solid and the ability to generalize appropriate apart from the disclaimer.

The disclaimer does not read to me as a cannot, but rather a should not. If you are going to use the data/report to generalize, you should be cautious and add the appropriate disclaimers to that section of work.

Answer 3

I disagree with the accepted answer. I think you should cite the work.

First, the gold standard for whether to cite does not exactly have to do with the paper quality or with such disclaimers, but whether it is relevant. Did it influence your work? Is it related to your work? Did it make a contribution to your research area?

Second, it's always safer to include a citation than to exclude it. If you're not sure how accurate the data is, you don't have to use the data (you can even say why you didn't use it), but you should cite any prior work on your research problem.

However, the report includes a "General use restriction"

This use restriction reads more like legalese than anything else. It does not say you shouldn't cite it. Rather, it tries to absolve the authors of any responsibility or liability for what you do with the report.

Does this actually mean that I cannot use the data at all?

Certainly not! The disclaimer even specifically says that you can use the data "for the purpose of estimating the [useful data] in [country]". Beyond this, you can likely use it and use your judgment or use it with a disclaimer.

Regarding quality, the only thing I can say is that the organization that ordered it seems very happy about it, as seems several other advocacy groups who have cross-links the report.

This seems like good evidence that this work is already considered to be useful in your area, and has made a contribution to the field. If so, then it would be prudent to cite such a contribution.

Answer 4

It depends. Why do you want to cite it? Until you are able to get more information about the provenance of the data, you shouldn't be making any direct references to it as support for any claim of yours. You have no idea how the data was gathered or what standards were used. If you can't get any more information, I would be careful about using it for anything substantive in a paper.

If, however, you merely wanted to make reference to it in a section addressing further research that is required into a topic (e.g. "an area requiring further research is whether x, a report by company y suggests blah, however, their sources and methodology were not disclosed [cite]), I don't see anything wrong with that.

Answer 5

After not having received a response from my inquiries from the company that authored the report, I have decided to play it safe and disregard it entirely from my work.