ReviewJornal vascular brasileiro2019
Anomalous values and missing data in clinical and experimental studies.
Review in Jornal vascular brasileiro, 2019. 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.
- Understanding the causal effects and heterogeneity between metabolic syndrome and lung function: a nationwide prospective cohort study in China.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Article
- Bicalutamide 25 mg combined with minoxidil 1 mg versus minoxidil 1 mg for female pattern hair loss: A randomized double-blind clinical trial.JAAD international · 2025Article
- A Comprehensive Dataset of Surface Water Quality Spanning 1940-2023 for Empirical and ML Adopted Research.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Assessment of the Efficacy and Durability of IncobotulinumtoxinA in the Treatment of the Upper Face in Adult Women.Dermatology and therapy · 2024Article
- Personal predictive model based on systemic inflammation markers for estimation of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2022Article
- Machine Learning-Assisted Ensemble Analysis for the Prediction of Acute Pancreatitis with Acute Kidney Injury.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
- Integrative Analysis of Peripheral Blood Indices for the Renal Sinus Invasion Prediction of T1 Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Ensemble Study Using Machine Learning-Assisted Decision-Support Models.Cancer management and research · 2022Article
- Profile of the use of dermoscopy among dermatologists in Brazil (2018).Anais brasileiros de dermatologiaArticle
- Prevalence and factors associated with body dysmorphic disorder in women under dermatological care at a Brazilian public institution.Anais brasileiros de dermatologiaArticle
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
During analysis of scientific research data, it is customary to encounter anomalous values or missing data. Anomalous values can be the result of errors of recording, typing, measurement by instruments, or may be true outliers. This review discusses concepts, examples and methods for identifying and dealing with such contingencies. In the case of missing data, techniques for imputation of the values are discussed in, order to avoid exclusion of the research subject, if it is not possible to retrieve information from registration forms or to re-address the participant.
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.