Research trends in British gastroenterology: publication rates in newly appointed NHS consultants over a nine year period.

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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Is gastroenterology research in decline? A comparison of abstract publication rates from The British Society of Gastroenterology meetings between 1995 and 2005.F1000Research · 2013
   Review
2. Why a PhD/MD enhances gastroenterological training.Frontline gastroenterology · 2010
   Review
3. Is medical research within the UK in decline? A study of publication rates from the British Society of Gastroenterology from 1994 to 2002.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2009
   Article
4. The role of research training during higher medical education in the promotion of academic medicine in the UK.Postgraduate medical journal · 2006
   Article
5. Meeting report of the British Society for Gastroenterology meeting, March 2003.Gut · 2003
   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

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as