ReviewBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2002
Papyrus to PowerPoint (P 2 P): metamorphosis of scientific communication.
Review in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cancer and chronic diseases in minority populations: the need for more educational materials in Spanish for healthcare providers.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2011Article
- Quality control of epidemiological lectures online: scientific evaluation of peer review.Croatian medical journal · 2007Article
- Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae to test the mutagenicity of household compounds: an open ended hypothesis-driven teaching lab.CBE life sciences education · 2007Article
- Scientific Journals are "faith based": is there science behind peer review?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2006Article
- Hope of prevention training in South Asia.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004Article
- The Clinical Biochemist Reviews: seeking international impact and influence.The Clinical biochemist. Reviews · 2003Article
- BIIJ embracing social media.Biomedical imaging and intervention journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.