ArticleeLife2017
The challenges of replication.
Article in eLife, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical EFT as an evidence-based practice for the treatment of psychological and physiological conditions: A systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Article
- A Multi-center Study on the Reproducibility of Drug-Response Assays in Mammalian Cell Lines.Cell systems · 2019Article
- Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond.PLoS biology · 2019Article
- Identification of stable senescence-associated reference genes.Aging cell · 2019Article
- Article
- Validating Antibodies for Quantitative Western Blot Measurements with Microwestern Array.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Getting rigorous with scientific rigor.Carcinogenesis · 2018Article
- A mathematical theory of the transcription repression (TR) therapy of cancer - whether and how it may work.Oncotarget · 2017Article
- Can cancer researchers accurately judge whether preclinical reports will reproduce?PLoS biology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
0 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interpreting the first results from the Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology requires a highly nuanced approach.
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.