ArticleF1000Research2017
Professional medical writing support and the reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts among high-impact general medical journals.
Article in F1000Research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prepublication abstract-only reports compared with full-text manuscripts for randomised controlled trials in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2024Pooled it
- Review
- Insights of Healthcare Professionals into Medical Writing Support at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Saudi Arabia.Cureus · 2024Article
- Professional medical writing support and the quality, ethics and timeliness of clinical trial reporting: a systematic review.Research integrity and peer review · 2019Review
- Professional writers can help to improve clarity of medical writing.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2018Article
- Professional medical writing support and the reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts among high-impact general medical journals.F1000Research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.