ArticleBritish medical journal (Clinical research ed.)1988
Fraud in medicine.
Article in British medical journal (Clinical research ed.), 1988. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fraud and deceit in medical research.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2012Article
- Further thoughts on authorship: gift authorship.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2012Article
- Criminals in the Citadel and Deceit all along the Watchtower: Irresponsibility, Fraud, and Complicity in the Search for Scientific Truth.Mens sana monographs · 2012Article
- The misconduct of redundant publication.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 1996Article
- Prescriptions for medical research II--Is medical research well served by peer review?BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1993Article
- Is it worth writing about?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 1993Article
- Is there a place for research in surgical training?Postgraduate medical journal · 1992Article
- Wind of change. II. Medical journals in Britain in 1988.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 1988Article
- Problems with peer review and alternatives.British medical journal (Clinical research ed.) · 1988Article
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.
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.