Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31234457›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019

Public Attitudes toward Biobanking of Human Biological Material for Research Purposes: A Literature Review.

Jan Domaradzki, Jakub Pawlikowski

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Correlative Science in the Cooperative Group System: Re-Engineering for Success.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Trust and Support for Cancer Research Biobanks: Insights from Cancer Patients in Poland.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jan DomaradzkiLaboratory of Health Sociology and Social Pathology, Karol Marcinkowski University of Medical Sciences, 60-806 Poznań, Poland. jandomar@ump.edu.pl.
Jakub PawlikowskiIndependent Laboratory of Sociology of Medicine, Medical University of Lublin, 20-059 Lublin, Poland. jpawlikowski@wp.pl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

AttitudeBiological Specimen BanksPublic OpinionBiomedical ResearchHumansTissue Donorsbiobankingbiobanksdonationreviewtissue bankstissue donorstrust

Identifiers

PMID31234457
PMCPMC6617000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.