Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24927763›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2014

Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis?

Trisha Greenhalgh, Jeremy Howick, Neal Maskrey, Evidence Based Medicine Renaissance Group

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 526 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
526citing papers in PubMed, 9 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.

NCT04093245 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Supporting the Creation of a LEARNing INteGrated Health System to Mobilize Context-adapted Knowledge With a Wiki Platform to Improve the Transitions of Frail Seniors From From Hospitals and Emergency Departments to the cOMmunity: Phase II

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaval UniversityRan2019 to 2022Enrolled4,000ConditionsTransition, Emergencies, Health Care Utilization, FrailtyArmsGEM nurse, pre- and post-hospitalization medication list reconciliation, systematic discharge summaries, medical follow-up appointment, follow-up phone call
NCT04140084 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Wiki Head CT Choice Study: Adaptation of Two Decision Aids to Support Shared Decision Making About Performing a Head CT for Adult and Pediatric Victims of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaval UniversityRan2018 to 2020Enrolled40ConditionsMild Traumatic Brain Injury, Emergencies, Decision-makingArmsReal-life clinical meetings
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

526 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2026
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Scientific Evidence in Public Health Decision-Making: A Systematic Literature Review of the Past 50 Years.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Guideline
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

466 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Trisha GreenhalghBarts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London E1 2AB, UK p.greenhalgh@qmul.ac.uk.
Jeremy HowickCentre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6NW, UK.
Neal MaskreyKeele University, Staffs ST5 5BG, UK.
Evidence Based Medicine Renaissance Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based Medicine

Identifiers

PMID24927763
PMCPMC4056639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.