Babies and consent: yet another NHS scandal. But it should lead to improvements in research governance within the NHS.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Therapeutic misconception: hope, trust and misconception in paediatric research.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2014
   Review
2. Regulating research, regulating professionals.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2010
   Article
3. Regulation and the social licence for medical research.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2008
   Article
4. What factors are important to parents making decisions about neonatal research?Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2005
   Article
5. Neonatal research: the parental perspective.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2004
   Article
6. Open letter to the chief medical officer.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2001
   Article
7. Ethical problems in respiratory care: the role of the law.Thorax · 2001
   Article
8. Investigating allegations of research misconduct. Worst outcome of Griffiths report would be that research becomes increasingly difficult.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2000
   Article
9. Inquiring into inquiries.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2000
   Article
10. Investigating allegations of research misconduct: the vital need for due process.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2000
    Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Investigating allegations of research misconduct. British association of perinatal medicine welcomes analysis of Griffiths report.2000

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as