ArticleJournal of clinical and translational research2018
Proving a negative? Methodological, statistical, and psychometric flaws in Ullmann et al. (2017) PTSD study.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Critical evaluation of arguments opposing male circumcision: A systematic review.Journal of evidence-based medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Psychological, psychosocial, and psychosexual aspects of penile circumcision.International journal of impotence research · 2023Review
- Neonatal male circumcision is associated with altered adult socio-affective processing.Heliyon · 2020Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ullmann et al. recently published a pilot study in Translational Psychiatry in which they report failing to find a statistically significant reduction in either hair cortisol or hair cortisone levels in circumcised men as compared with genitally intact (noncircumcised) men. Based on such null findings, the authors purport to have "refuted the psycho-pathological long-term effects of circumcision" and that the lack of significant results, "add to the growing body of evidence in the literature that male circumcision is not likely psychologically traumatizing across the life-span." In addition, they claim that they have proven a "healthy functionality of the LHPA axis" in men subjected to circumcision during infancy or childhood. However, it is not possible to draw any such conclusions on the basis of a null finding, especially one derived from an underpowered study in which the trend in the data suggest, if anything, that an adequately powered study may have shown the opposite of what the authors claim. RELEVANCE FOR PATIENTS: When combined with other weaknesses in study design, measurement, and interpretation, it becomes apparent that the authors' conclusions are not supported by their data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30873485PMC6412615W2791025987What 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.