ArticleWorld journal of surgery2009
The implications of fraud in medical and scientific research.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Bias: Aggregate Approaches to Conflicts of Interest Research and Policy in Biomedical Research.World medical & health policy · 2024Article
- Criminals in the Citadel and Deceit all along the Watchtower: Irresponsibility, Fraud, and Complicity in the Search for Scientific Truth.Mens sana monographs · 2012Article
- Retracted Publications in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery: What Mistakes Are Being Made?OTO openArticle
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
Fraud is an important issue that affects research of both scientific and clinical fields because of its potential to adversely affect patient care. Fraud can take many forms, each with varying prevalence and implications. A number of ethical institutions have been created to investigate and regulate this malpractice. Using case examples, we describe the various forms of fraud and their potential implications. The increasing importance of editorial responsibility is highlighted and discussed. Finally, we suggest solutions for how to effectively regulate and eradicate this practise.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19701662What 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.