ArticleEuropean radiology2013
Radiological journals in the online world: should we think Open?
Article in European radiology, 2013. 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.
- To share or not to share? Expected pros and cons of data sharing in radiological research.European radiology · 2018Article
- An editor's journey: 6 years with European Radiology.European radiology · 2013Article
- Radiological journals in the online world: should we think Open? A response.European radiology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledThe scientific community is becoming increasingly web-based and the role of online communication is continuously expanding. In this setting, one fact and two trends should be considered. The fact is the decision by Britain's government and by the European Union to make all papers deriving from projects that were paid for using public funds freely available online for reading and redistribution (an approach already widely used in the US). The trends are the 'open review' process and the future perspective of having online-only scientific journals; the balance of advantages and disadvantages of such an approach is debated. These factors are challenging the scientific community worldwide and radiological scientific societies should play a relevant role in driving these processes. KEY POINTS: • Research funded by the EU and Britain's government will soon be freely available • The open-review process has started in certain scientific communities, but not yet within radiology • Online communication is increasing its power within the scientific community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23443349What 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.