Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25713962›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of public health2015

Old myths, new myths: challenging myths in public health.

Sarah M Viehbeck, Mark Petticrew, Steven Cummins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Popular infection prevention myths related to single-use plastics.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Community Water Fluoridation: Caveats to Implement Justice in Public Oral Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Presuppositions Underlying Health Awareness Days.American journal of public health · 2015
    Article
  19. Purtle and Roman Respond.American journal of public health · 2015
    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.

Sarah M ViehbeckSarah M. Viehbeck holds an adjunct appointment with the School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario. Mark Petticrew and Steven Cummins are with the Department of Social and Environmental Health Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, England.
Mark Petticrew
Steven Cummins

Funding

Department of Health SRF-2010-03-05
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Myths are widely held beliefs and are frequently perpetuated through telling and retelling. We examined 10 myths in public health research and practice. Where possible, we traced their origins, interrogated their current framing in relation to the evidence, and offered possible alternative ways of thinking about them. These myths focus on the nature of public health and public health interventions, and the nature of evidence in public health. Although myths may have some value, they should not be privileged in an evidence-informed public health context.

Indexed as

Public Health PracticeStereotypingEvidence-Based MedicineHumansInformation DisseminationPoliticsPreventive MedicineResearch

Identifiers

PMID25713962
PMCPMC4358183

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.