Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25334033›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2014

How to make more published research true.

John P A Ioannidis

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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 247 papers, 18 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
247citing papers in PubMed, 18 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

247 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Citicoline for treating people with acute ischemic stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. No significant association between PIK3CA mutation and survival of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A meta-analysis.Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology. Medical sciences = Hua zhong ke ji da xue xue bao. Yi xue Ying De wen ban = Huazhong keji daxue xuebao. Yixue Yingdewen ban · 2017
    Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Prognostic role of tumor PIK3CA mutation in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2016
    Pooled it
  19. Trial
  20. Article

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

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

1 author.

John P A IoannidisMeta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America; Department of Medicine, Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford, California, United States of America; Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, United States of America; Department of Statistics, Stanford University School of Humanities and Sciences, Stanford, California, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a 2005 paper that has been accessed more than a million times, John Ioannidis explained why most published research findings were false. Here he revisits the topic, this time to address how to improve matters. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Indexed as

PublicationsPublishingResearch

Identifiers

PMID25334033
PMCPMC4204808

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.