Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26547570›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of hematology2016

Introduction of Transplant Registry Unified Management Program 2 (TRUMP2): scripts for TRUMP data analyses, part I (variables other than HLA-related data).

Yoshiko Atsuta

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of hematology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 173 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
173citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

173 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

113 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Yoshiko AtsutaJapanese Data Center for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1-20 Daiko-Minami, Higashi-ku, Nagoya, 461-0047, Japan. y-atsuta@jdchct.or.jp.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Collection and analysis of information on diseases and post-transplant courses of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients have played important roles in improving therapeutic outcomes in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Efficient, high-quality data collection systems are essential. The introduction of the Second-Generation Transplant Registry Unified Management Program (TRUMP2) is intended to improve data quality and more efficient data management. The TRUMP2 system will also expand possible uses of data, as it is capable of building a more complex relational database. The construction of an accessible data utilization system for adequate data utilization by researchers would promote greater research activity. Study approval and management processes and authorship guidelines also need to be organized within this context. Quality control of processes for data manipulation and analysis will also affect study outcomes. Shared scripts have been introduced to define variables according to standard definitions for quality control and improving efficiency of registry studies using TRUMP data.

Indexed as

Data CollectionDatasets as TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationRegistriesAdolescentAdultChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantMaleMiddle AgedQuality ControlTransplantation, HomologousYoung AdultOutcome registryShared scriptTRUMP2

Identifiers

PMID26547570

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.