ReviewBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2004
Assessing ethics of trials in systematic reviews.
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. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The efficacy of a rubber bristles interdental cleaner on parameters of oral soft tissue health-a systematic review.International journal of dental hygiene · 2022Pooled it
- The efficacy of gefitinib supplementation for breast cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies.Medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Interventions to improve gross motor performance in children with neurodevelopmental disorders: a meta-analysis.BMC pediatrics · 2016Pooled it
- Systematic review and metaanalysis of statins for heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia in children: evaluation of cholesterol changes and side effects.Pediatric cardiology · 2009Pooled it
- Article
- Article
- The process of pain assessment in people with dementia living in nursing homes: a scoping review.Palliative care and social practice · 2025Article
- Caregivers' experiences, challenges, and needs in caring for people with dementia in India: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- What about the fundamentals of nursing-its interventions and its continuity among older people in need of home- or facility-based care: a scoping review.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- Ethically Driven and Methodologically Tailored: Setting the Agenda for Systematic Reviews in Domestic Violence and Abuse.Journal of family violence · 2023Article
- Fundamental nursing care focusing on older people's needs and continuity of long-term care: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Nursing care and models of care in relation to older people in long-term care contexts: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Process of pain assessment in people with dementia living in nursing homes: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Article
- Formative peer assessment in higher healthcare education programmes: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Teaching strategies and outcome assessments targeting critical thinking in bachelor nursing students: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Mental health of people detained within the justice system in Africa: systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of mental health systems · 2019Review
- Ethics reporting practices in randomized controlled trials of physical therapy interventions after stroke.Archives of physiotherapy · 2018Article
- Ethics approval: responsibilities of journal editors, authors and research ethics committees.The Pan African medical journal · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 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.