Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23293377›Full record

ArticleThe Cambridge law journal2011

AUTONOMY, LIBERTY, AND MEDICAL DECISION-MAKING.

John Coggon, José Miola

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Cambridge law journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Ensuring Risk Awareness of Vulnerable Patients in the Post-Montgomery Era: Treading a Fine Line.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Why the Elective Caesarean Lottery is Ethically Impermissible.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Brainjacking in deep brain stimulation and autonomy.Ethics and information technology · 2018
    Article
  20. Article
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.

John CoggonSchool of Law, University of Manchester.
José Miola

Funding

Wellcome Trust 087439
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Identifiers

PMID23293377
PMCPMC3535760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.