ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2018
Scientific Misconduct: A Global Concern.
Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Why is it important to implement meta-research in universities and institutes with medical research activities?Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2025Article
- Article
- Deceiving scientific research, misconduct events are possibly a more common practice than foreseen.Environmental sciences Europe · 2022Article
- The Plague of Plagiarism: Prevention and Cure!!!Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In today's world, evil appears to be all pervading. Medical publication is no exception. Scientific misconduct in medical writing is slowly becoming a global concern, especially over the last few decades. While the occurrence of such events is certainly rare, every researcher and reader should be aware of this entity. The researcher should ensure that no inadvertent error is construed as misconduct, and should take every effort to guard against it, and the reader should have a critical eye for the same. This article looks into various aspects of scientific misconduct and encourages awareness regarding the same.
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.