Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27060090›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2016

Erratum to: Using a discrete choice experiment to value the QLU-C10D: feasibility and sensitivity to presentation format.

R Norman, R Viney, N K Aaronson, J E Brazier, D Cella, D S J Costa, P M Fayers, G Kemmler, S Peacock, A S Pickard and 5 more

Abstract readPublished Erratum
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

R NormanSchool of Public Health, Curtin University, Perth, Australia. Richard.norman@curtin.edu.au.
R VineyCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Sydney, Australia.
N K AaronsonThe Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J E BrazierSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
D CellaDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
D S J CostaPsycho-Oncology Cooperative Research Group (PoCoG), University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
P M FayersInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
G KemmlerInnsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria.
S PeacockFaculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada.
A S PickardDepartment of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
D RowenSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
D J StreetSchool of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
G VelikovaLeeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
T A YoungSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
M T KingPsycho-Oncology Cooperative Research Group (PoCoG), University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Identifiers

PMID27060090

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.