The other face of research governance.

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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Recruiting patients to medical research: double blind randomised trial of "opt-in" versus "opt-out" strategies.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005
   Trial
2. Using evidence when planning for trial recruitment: An international perspective from time-poor trialists.PloS one · 2019
   Article
3. Strengthening research governance for sustainable research: experiences from three Zimbabwean universities.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2014
   Article
4. Challenges in quantifying the patient-reported burden of herpes zoster and post-herpetic neuralgia in the UK: learnings from the Zoster Quality of Life (ZQOL) study.BMC research notes · 2013
   Article
5. Procedure versus process: ethical paradigms and the conduct of qualitative research.BMC medical ethics · 2012
   Article
6. Research governance: regulating risk and reducing harm?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2006
   Review
7. Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: time has come to face research governance.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004
   Article
8. Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: research governance is about protection, not convenience.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004
   Article
9. Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: seeking a balance: response from the Department of Health and COREC.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004
   Article
10. Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: good governance is needed.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004
    Article
11. Clinical research under the cosh again.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004
    Article
12. View from the research and development office.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004
    Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Clinical research under the cosh again.2004
• Commented on by
  View from the research and development office.2004
• Commented on by
  Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: seeking a balance: response from the Department of Health and COREC.2004
• Commented on by
  Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: good governance is needed.2004
• Commented on by
  Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: research governance is about protection, not convenience.2004
• Commented on by
  Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: time has come to face research governance.2004

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as