ArticlePLoS computational biology2015
Ten Simple Rules for Protecting Research Integrity.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Doctored: fraud, arrogance, and tragedy in the quest to cure Alzheimer's": an important new book with direct relevance to GeroScience.GeroScience · 2025Article
- An Updated Framework for Industry Funding of Food and Nutrition Research: Managing Financial Conflicts and Scientific Integrity.The Journal of nutrition · 2022Article
- Article
- Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands.F1000Research · 2022Article
- Deceiving scientific research, misconduct events are possibly a more common practice than foreseen.Environmental sciences Europe · 2022Article
- A brief guide to the science and art of writing manuscripts in biomedicine.Journal of translational medicine · 2020Review
- Ten simple rules for starting research in your late teens.PLoS computational biology · 2020Article
- Establishing and Maintaining Research Integrity at Academic Institutions: Challenges and Opportunities.The American journal of medicine · 2020Review
- The Quest for Clarity in Research Integrity: A Conceptual Schema.Science and engineering ethics · 2019Article
- The Value of Vagueness in the Politics of Authorship.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2017Article
- The Virus of Vagueness in Authorship.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.