The "Smallwood report": method or madness?

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Complementary/alternative medicine: engulfed by postmodernism, anti-science and regressive thinking.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2009
   Article
2. The impact of NHS based primary care complementary therapy services on health outcomes and NHS costs: a review of service audits and evaluations.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2009
   Review
3. How do we evaluate outcome in an integrative oncology program?Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2008
   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

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as