ArticlePLoS medicine2010
Ghostwriting at elite academic medical centers in the United States.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Authorship Policies at U.S. Doctoral Universities: A Review and Recommendations for Future Policies.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Pooled it
- A systematic review of research on the meaning, ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines.PloS one · 2011Pooled it
- Knowledge of undisclosed corporate authorship ("ghostwriting") reduces the perceived credibility of antidepressant research: a randomized vignette study with experienced nurses.BMC research notes · 2012Trial
- Stakeholder views about the responsibilities of principal investigators in multicenter randomized controlled trials.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2026Article
- Article
- Publication of observational studies making claims of causation over time.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2024Article
- Perish or Publish Dilemma: Challenges to Responsible Authorship.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Review
- Describing the Attributional Nature of Academic Dishonesty.Medical science educator · 2019Article
- Ethics of using language editing services in an era of digital communication and heavily multi-authored papers.Science and engineering ethics · 2014Article
- How basic scientists help the pharmaceutical industry market drugs.PLoS biology · 2013Article
- Those who have the gold make the evidence: how the pharmaceutical industry biases the outcomes of clinical trials of medications.Science and engineering ethics · 2012Article
- Challenging medical ghostwriting in US courts.PLoS medicine · 2012Article
- Authorship issues.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society · 2012Article
- A comparison of DSM-IV and DSM-5 panel members' financial associations with industry: a pernicious problem persists.PLoS medicine · 2012Article
- Exorcising ghostwriting…. Ghostwriting could potentially have serious repercussions for science and should therefore be treated as research misconduct.EMBO reports · 2011Article
- Knowledge of ghostwriting and financial conflicts-of-interest reduces the perceived credibility of biomedical research.BMC research notes · 2011Article
- Successfully develop a list of authors of a scientific manuscript.La Tunisie medicaleArticle
- Authors' awareness of concepts in the authorship of scientific publications: Viewpoints of the dental faculty in India.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
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
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.