ArticleBritish medical journal (Clinical research ed.)1988
Problems with peer review and alternatives.
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 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Peer review for improving the quality of grant applications.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2007Pooled it
- What breaks when federal commitments break: comment on Beccia et al.SSM. Mental health · 2026Article
- Identifying and Minimizing Incentives for Competing Interests in Sports Medicine Publications.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Nanopublication-based semantic publishing and reviewing: a field study with formalization papers.PeerJ. Computer science · 2023Article
- Publication practice in Taxonomy: Global inequalities and potential bias against negative results.PloS one · 2022Article
- Article
- Experts and evidence.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1996Article
- Promoting research into peer review.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1994Article
- Chance, concurrence, and clustering. Analysis of reviewers' recommendations on 1,000 submissions to the Journal of Clinical Investigation.The Journal of clinical investigation · 1994Article
- Contribution to scientific research in paediatrics in The Netherlands: evaluation according to subspeciality over a 10-year period.European journal of pediatrics · 1993Article
- How reliable is peer review of scientific abstracts? Looking back at the 1991 Annual Meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine.Journal of general internal medicine · 1993Article
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.