ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2004
Revalidation: the purpose needs to be clear.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Evolving Purposes of Medical Revalidation in the United Kingdom: A Qualitative Study of Professional and Regulatory Narratives.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2018Article
- The implementation of medical revalidation: an assessment using normalisation process theory.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- National programmes for validating physician competence and fitness for practice: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2016Article
- Revalidation: a critical perspective.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2011Article
- Using a 'peer assessment questionnaire' in primary medical care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2005Article
- Revalidation: cracks at first, now chasms.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2005Article
- GP perceptions of appraisal: professional development, performance management, or both?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2005Article
- Revalidation: swallow hard.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
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.