The inappropriate use of formulae and references and the possible domino effect of spurious results.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

1. Evaluation using latent class models of the diagnostic performances of three ELISA tests commercialized for the serological diagnosis of Coxiella burnetii infection in domestic ruminants.Veterinary research · 2021
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Assessing a formula for sample size when using an imperfect test.2019
• Commented on by
  Clarification related to the commentary titled "The inappropriate use of formulae and references and the possible domino effect of spurious results" written by Gautam et al. 2019.2020
• Comment on
  OptisampleTM: Open web-based application to optimize sampling strategies for active surveillance activities at the herd level illustrated using Porcine Respiratory Reproductive Syndrome (PRRS).2017

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as