ReviewBMC medicine2016
Reporting transparency: making the ethical mandate explicit.
Review in BMC medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- How Do Nurse Researchers Determine Risk When Applying for Ethical Approval for Qualitative Research?Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
- Misreporting of Patient-Relevant and Study Design Elements in Anesthesiology Randomized Controlled Trials: An Observational Study.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Observational
- "Sometimes They Exclude Us because of Our Age-That's Not Right": Perceptions of HIV Cure Research Among Diverse Long-Term Survivors in the United States.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2025Article
- Article
- The Songdo consensus: Development of minimum reporting standards for studies of intervention in idiopathic anal fistula using a modified nominal group technique.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025Article
- Dissemination and outcome reporting bias in clinical malaria intervention trials: a cross-sectional analysis.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Navigating the Landscape of Digital Twins in Medicine: A Relational Bioethical Inquiry.Asian bioethics review · 2024Article
- Article
- Developing public health competency statements and frameworks: a scoping review and thematic analysis of approaches.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Paper 4: a review of reporting and disseminating approaches for rapid reviews in health policy and systems research.Systematic reviews · 2022Review
- Article
- Reporting guidelines should be free to publish, read, and use.Journal of global health · 2020Review
- Is there an agreement between self-reported medical diagnosis in the CARTaGENE cohort and the Québec administrative health databases?International journal of population data science · 2020Article
- Articulating 'free, prior and informed consent' (FPIC) for engineered gene drives.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
- Article
- A Call to Accountability: Reporting Outcomes in Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2019Article
- The reporting of studies conducted using observational routinely collected health data statement for pharmacoepidemiology (RECORD-PE).BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2018Article
- Enhancing primary reports of randomized controlled trials: Three most common challenges and suggested solutions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018Review
- The file drawer effect: A call for meticulous methodology and tolerance for non-significant results.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2017Article
- Sex-Divergent Clinical Outcomes and Precision Medicine: An Important New Role for Institutional Review Boards and Research Ethics Committees.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Improving the transparency and quality of reporting in biomedical research is considered ethically important; yet, this is often based on practical reasons such as the facilitation of peer review. Surprisingly, there has been little explicit discussion regarding the ethical obligations that underpin reporting guidelines. In this commentary, we suggest a number of ethical drivers for the improved reporting of research. These ethical drivers relate to researcher integrity as well as to the benefits derived from improved reporting such as the fair use of resources, minimizing risk of harms, and maximizing benefits. Despite their undoubted benefit to reporting completeness, questions remain regarding the extent to which reporting guidelines can influence processes beyond publication, including researcher integrity or the uptake of scientific research findings into policy or practice. Thus, we consider investigation on the effects of reporting guidelines an important step in providing evidence of their benefits.
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.