ArticlePLoS medicine2014
A stronger post-publication culture is needed for better science.
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 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Laser-based refractive surgery techniques to treat myopia in adults. An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Acta ophthalmologica · 2022Review
- Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- Understanding the nature and scope of clinical research commentaries in PubMed.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Article
- Open collaborative writing with Manubot.PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
- Editorial Processes in Free Open Access Medical Educational (FOAM) Resources.AEM education and training · 2018Article
- Reproducibility and transparency in biomedical sciences.Oral diseases · 2017Article
- Fortifying the Corrective Nature of Post-publication Peer Review: Identifying Weaknesses, Use of Journal Clubs, and Rewarding Conscientious Behavior.Science and engineering ethics · 2017Article
- Article
- Beyond the Impact Factor - What do alternative metrics have to offer?GMS journal for medical education · 2017Article
- Systemic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic imaging technologies.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2016Article
- Where next for the reproducibility agenda in computational biology?BMC systems biology · 2016Article
- Reviewing post-publication peer review.Trends in genetics : TIG · 2015Article
- Rewarding peer reviewers: maintaining the integrity of science communication.Journal of Korean medical science · 2015Review
- Redrawing the frontiers in the age of post-publication review.Frontiers in genetics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Hilda Bastian considers post-publication commenting and the cultural changes that are needed to better capture this intellectual effort. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.