Our readers' voice. Letters to the editor are an important component of the discussion of scientific articles, in Deutsches Arzteblatt as in other journals. our correspondence pages reflect a diversity of opinion thanks to the love of debate among our readers--and thanks to a few rules.

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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Letters to the editor on the Zika virus: a bibliometric analysis.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021
   Article
2. Letter to Editor, a scientific forum for discussion.Journal of current ophthalmology · 2016
   Article
3. What do letters to the editor publish about randomized controlled trials? A cross-sectional study.BMC research notes · 2013
   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

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as