ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2015
Disclosures, conflict of interest, and funding issues in urogynecology articles: a bibliometric study.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Systematic review and meta-analyses of studies analysing instructions to authors from 1987 to 2017.Nature communications · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe ethical behavior of authors, editors, and journals is increasingly placed in the spotlight, by both the public and the research community. Disclosures and conflict of interest (COI) statements of publishing authors represent one important aspect. We aimed to unravel the current management of disclosures, COI, and funding statements in the subspecialty urogynecology.
methodsA bibliometric study was carried out. We included six journals that published urogynecology articles between January and December 2013. All original articles, reviews, and opinion articles were assessed for the presence of disclosure/COI and funding statements. Information given on the official disclosure form was compared with information given in the final article (International Urogynecology Journal).
resultsAll journals investigated require disclosure and funding statements in their instructions to authors. Of the 434 articles included, almost all contained a disclosure statement (98-100 %). Funding statements were present in 41-100 % of articles, indicating a difference in journal type (50 % on average among urogynecology journals; 75 % on average among general gynecology journals). The main source of funding was "grants" (58 %), followed by "none" (16 %), "industry" (16 %), and lastly "hospital/university" (10 %). Disclosure statements in the article were identical to the official disclosure form in 80 % (IUJ).
conclusionsDisclosure/COI statements were included in almost all urogynecology articles investigated. Their content, however, is sometimes incomplete and should possibly be monitored more closely by journals and authors. Despite universal requirements of journals, the reporting of funding seems inconsistent. This issue in addition to the completeness of disclosures should be given more attention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25990207What 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.