ReviewBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2006
Research protocols: waiving confidentiality for the greater good.
Review in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Reporting of analyses from randomized controlled trials with multiple arms: a systematic review.BMC medicine · 2013Pooled it
- Reporting Quality of Endoscopic Colorectal Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trials: Adherence to Recommendations and Interventions.Gastro hep advances · 2024Review
- Article
- Evaluating the Generalizability and Reproducibility of Scientific Research.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2022Article
- Preferred Reporting Items for Root and Canal Anatomy in the Human Dentition (PROUD 2020) - A Systematic Review and a Proposal for a Standardized Protocol.European endodontic journal · 2020Article
- Article
- Cross-sectional analysis of UK research studies in 2015: results from a scoping project with the UK Health Research Authority.BMJ open · 2018Article
- Preclinical efficacy studies in investigator brochures: Do they enable risk-benefit assessment?PLoS biology · 2018Article
- Article
- Trends in the number and the quality of trial protocols involving children submitted to a French Institutional Review Board.BMC medical research methodology · 2017Article
- Article
- Authorization of Animal Experiments Is Based on Confidence Rather than Evidence of Scientific Rigor.PLoS biology · 2016Article
- Agreements between Industry and Academia on Publication Rights: A Retrospective Study of Protocols and Publications of Randomized Clinical Trials.PLoS medicine · 2016Article
- From protocol to published report: a study of consistency in the reporting of academic drug trials.Trials · 2016Article
- Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: cohort study on trial protocols and journal publications.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2014Article
- Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research.Lancet (London, England) · 2014Article
- Sample size determinations in original research protocols for randomised clinical trials submitted to UK research ethics committees: review.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2013Review
- Learning from failure--rationale and design for a study about discontinuation of randomized trials (DISCO study).BMC medical research methodology · 2012Article
- Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: interviews with trialists.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 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.