Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24714396›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2014

The use of preliminary scientific evidence in public health: a case study of XMRV.

Kumanan Wilson, Katherine Atkinson, Jennifer Keelan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Kumanan WilsonDepartments of Medicine and of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
Katherine AtkinsonClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
Jennifer KeelanDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research MOP-119492
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Kumanan Wilson and colleagues explain how the rapid response to XMRV as a novel pathogen has highlighted some challenges pertaining to policy-making and editorial responsibilities. The impact on policy and the propagation of the initial scientific information may not cease if the evidence is disproven and retracted from the peer-reviewed literature, which creates a challenge for regulators and scientific journals. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Indexed as

Editorial PoliciesPolicy MakingBlood DonorsHealth PolicyHumansPublic HealthRetroviridae InfectionsXenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus

Identifiers

PMID24714396
PMCPMC3979645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.