The need for reporting negative results - a 90 year update.

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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

1. The Effects of Sesquiterpene Lactones on the Differentiation of Human or Animal Cells CulturedFrontiers in pharmacology · 2022
   Pooled it
2. Evaluating the predictive accuracy of curated biological pathways in a public knowledgebase.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2022
   Article
3. Self-correction in science: The effect of retraction on the frequency of citations.PloS one · 2022
   Article
4. A hitchhiker's guide to working with large, open-source neuroimaging datasets.Nature human behaviour · 2021
   Article
5. The publication symmetry test: a simple editorial heuristic to combat publication bias.Journal of clinical and translational research · 2018
   Article
6. Making 'null effects' informative: statistical techniques and inferential frameworks.Journal of clinical and translational research · 2018
   Article
7. Proving a negative? Methodological, statistical, and psychometric flaws in Ullmann et al. (2017) PTSD study.Journal of clinical and translational research · 2018
   Article

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

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.