ArticleThe New England journal of medicine2016
Data Sharing.
Article in The New England journal of medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 158 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
158 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Improving the transparency of meta-analyses with interactive web applications.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2021Pooled it
- A Meta-Analysis ofG3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2020Pooled it
- Adolescent cohorts assessing growth, cardiovascular and cognitive outcomes in low and middle-income countries.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Do periapical and periodontal pathologies affect Schneiderian membrane appearance? Systematic review of studies using cone-beam computed tomography.Clinical oral investigations · 2017Pooled it
- Prediction of overall survival for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: development of a prognostic model through a crowdsourced challenge with open clinical trial data.The Lancet. Oncology · 2017Trial
- Eras of bioinformatics technologies from command-line interfaces to artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- Exploring molecular signatures of senescence with marker, an R Toolkit for evaluating gene sets as phenotypic markers.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Article
- JASPAR 2026: expansion of transcription factor binding profiles and integration of deep learning models.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- CMEO: a metadata-centric ontology for clinical studies exploration and harmonization assessment.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Relationship between sarcopenia and type 2 diabetes mellitus among adults with prediabetes: evidence from a prospective cohort study.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Article
- Using large-scale population-based data to improve disease risk assessment of clinical variants.Nature genetics · 2025Review
- What Have Data Standards Ever Done for Us?Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2025Review
- Request of endocrinology and metabolism journals for data sharing statements in clinical trial reports: a survey.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Breaking barriers: broadening neuroscience education via cloud platforms and course-based undergraduate research.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2025Article
- Publication integrity: what is it, why does it matter, how it is safeguarded and how could we do better?Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2025Review
- Identification of transcription factor co-binding patterns with non-negative matrix factorization.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- Clinical Research Informatics: a Decade-in-Review.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2024Review
- JASPAR 2024: 20th anniversary of the open-access database of transcription factor binding profiles.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- Hiding in plain sight: a research parasite's perspective on new lessons in old data.GigaScience · 2024Article
98 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aerial view of the concept of data sharing is beautiful. What could be better than having high-quality information carefully reexamined for the possibility that new nuggets of useful data are lying there, previously unseen? The potential for leveraging existing results for even more benefit pays appropriate increased tribute to the patients who put themselves at risk to generate the data. The moral imperative to honor their collective sacrifice is the trump card that takes this trick. However, many of us who have actually conducted clinical research, managed clinical studies and data collection and analysis, and curated data sets have . . .
Indexed as
Identifiers
26789876What 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.