Fragility, Spin, and Interpretation of Randomized Clinical Trials.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. To: Science over language: a plea to consider language bias in scientific publishing.Critical care science · 2025
   Article
2. Paediatric surgical trials, their fragility index, and why to avoid using it to evaluate results.Pediatric surgery international · 2022
   Article
3. Contextualizing the Positive Effects of the Well Elderly 2 Trial: A Response to Schelly and Ohl (2019).The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  The Fragility and Reliability of Conclusions of Anesthesia and Critical Care Randomized Trials With Statistically Significant Findings: A Systematic Review.2019

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as