ArticleCirculation2015
Correction.
Article in Circulation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum for
Authors and funding
0 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the article by Gale et al, “Mental Disorders Across the Adult Life Course and Future Coronary Heart Disease: Evidence for General Susceptibility,” which was published in the January 14, 2014 issue of the journal (Circulation. 2014;129:186–193. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATION AHA.113.002065), there were errors in reporting some of the results. Specifically, due to coding mistakes during programming, there were errors in the number of men reported as having been diagnosed with some forms of mental disorder at the conscription examination in early adulthood.
Identifiers
25986454What 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.