Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19165609›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2009

Scientific misconduct and participation rates in population-based epidemiological research: the NOWAC study.

Line Bøe Nielsen, Eiliv Lund

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Line Bøe NielsenInstitute of Community Medicine, University Of Tromso, 9037 Tromso, Norway.
Eiliv Lund

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To investigate the possible effect of a scientific misconduct case and the subsequent immense publicity on the participation rates in a population based epidemiological study. We investigated willingness to participate, by donating a blood sample, among random samples of 500 women included in the Norwegian women and cancer study-NOWAC. The women were asked to participate during a period before, under and after the discovery of misconduct January 2006. This population based sampling was independent of the case. Letters of invitation and a questionnaire were regularly mailed from 2003 till 2006, and here we use the period from November till April of two subsequent years; 2004/2005 and 2005/2006. Population based in Norway 30,216 Norwegian women born 1943-1957 invited to participate. Response rates (%) for returning a blood sample and for actively responding with a "No" to the invitation. The active response of a "No" increased immediately after the publicity of the scientific misconduct, but lasted only for 2 months. The response rate for blood samples was only marginally affected in the same period, and increased over previous level 3 months after the misconduct was publicly known. The widespread publicity related to the scientific misconduct did not affect the response rate in this population based study. This might imply that the public trust increased as a consequence of the public discussions that followed.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationEpidemiologic StudiesScientific MisconductAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalFemaleFraudHumansMouth NeoplasmsNorwayPublic RelationsSurveys and QuestionnairesTrustAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.