Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14703546›Full record

ReviewBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2004

Assessing the quality of research.

Paul Glasziou, Jan P Vandenbroucke, Iain Chalmers

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 86 papers, 16 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing papers in PubMed, 16 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

86 citing papers in PubMed, 16 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Guideline
  12. Guideline
  13. Guideline
  14. Pooled it
  15. Fertility awareness-based methods for contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2004
    Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Trial
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Paul GlasziouDepartment of Primary Health Care, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LF. paul.glasziou@dphpc.ox.ac.uk
Jan P Vandenbroucke
Iain Chalmers

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchEvidence-Based MedicineResearch DesignReview Literature as TopicRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID14703546
PMCPMC313908

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.