ArticleKorean journal of radiology
Age of Data in Contemporary Research Articles Published in Representative General Radiology Journals.
Article in Korean journal of radiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To analyze and compare the age of data in contemporary research articles published in representative general radiology journals. Materials and Methods: We searched for articles reporting original research studies analyzing patient data that were published in the print issues of the Korean Journal of Radiology (KJR), European Radiology (ER), and Radiology in 2017. Eligible articles were reviewed to extract data collection period (time from first patient recruitment to last patient follow-up) and age of data (time between data collection end and publication). The journals were compared in terms of the proportion of articles reporting the data collection period to the level of calendar month and regarding the age of data. Results: There were 50, 492, and 254 eligible articles in KJR, ER, and Radiology, respectively. Of these, 44 (88%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 75.8-94.8%), 359 (73%; 95% CI: 68.9-76.7%), and 211 (83.1%; 95% CI: 78-87.2%) articles, respectively, provided enough details of data collection period, revealing a significant difference between ER and Radiology ( Conclusion: Korean Journal of Radiology did not fall behind ER or Radiology in reporting of data collection period, but showed a significantly greater age of data than ER and Radiology, suggesting that KJR should take measures to improve the timeliness of its data.
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.