ArticleJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2006
Lapses at the new England journal of medicine.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Relationships among commercial practices and author conflicts of interest in biomedical publishing.PloS one · 2020Article
- Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research, Abortion, and Publication Bias in theThe Linacre quarterly · 2019Article
- Medical discovery in the age of breaking news.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2013Article
- Conflicts of interest at medical journals: the influence of industry-supported randomised trials on journal impact factors and revenue - cohort study.PLoS medicine · 2010Article
- Legal remedies for medical ghostwriting: imposing fraud liability on guest authors of ghostwritten articles.PLoS medicine · 2010Article
- Biomedical research and corporate interests: a question of academic freedom.Mens sana monographs · 2008Article
- Should medical journals carry drug advertising? Yes.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2007Article
- Clinical studies in medical journals.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2007Article
- Response to 'Lapses at the NEJM'.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
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.