ReviewCirculation2019
Reveal, Don't Conceal: Transforming Data Visualization to Improve Transparency.
Review in Circulation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Building a synthesis-ready research ecosystem: fostering collaboration and open science to accelerate biomedical translation.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Pooled it
- Revisiting Some Useful Statistical Guidelines inCirculation research · 2021Guideline
- Data Analysis Planning and Reporting for Confirmatory Multi-Lab Preclinical Trials: A Tutorial.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2026Review
- Article
- Ten Recommendations for Improving Research on Stroke Motor Rehabilitation: A Unified Perspective.Restorative neurology and neuroscience · 2026Review
- Quantifying Correlogram Shape to Analyze Neuronal Firing Dynamics Recorded in TBI-on-a-Chip.Neuroinformatics · 2026Article
- What Is Data Visualization?Journal of graduate medical education · 2025Article
- Interpretation of Health-Smart Home Data and Implications for Clinical Decision-Making: Inductive Content Analysis.JMIR nursing · 2025Article
- Visualising accelerometer-based 24/7 human movement behaviour data: an umbrella review and framework development from the LABDA project.Journal of activity, sedentary and sleep behaviors · 2025Review
- Improving statistical reporting in psychology.Communications psychology · 2025Review
- The mixed-meal tolerance test as an appetite assay: methodological and practical considerations.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2025Review
- Sex-Independent Upregulation of miR-146a-5p in Parkinson's Disease Patients: A Longitudinal Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Informative data visualization with raincloud plots in JASP.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Navigating the paradigm shift of sex inclusive preclinical research and lessons learnt.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Descriptive statistics for cardiothoracic surgeons: part 2 - the foundation of data interpretation.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2025Article
- An accessible digital imaging workflow for multiplexed quantitative analysis of adult eye phenotypes inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Sea stack plots: Replacing bar charts with histograms.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Supporting Student Competencies in Graph Reading, Interpretation, Construction, and Evaluation.CBE life sciences education · 2024Article
- Peer review of clinical and translational research manuscripts: Perspectives from statistical collaborators.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Review
- Role of Human Epicardial Adipose Tissue-Derived miR-92a-3p in Myocardial Redox State.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Reports highlighting the problems with the standard practice of using bar graphs to show continuous data have prompted many journals to adopt new visualization policies. These policies encourage authors to avoid bar graphs and use graphics that show the data distribution; however, they provide little guidance on how to effectively display data. We conducted a systematic review of studies published in top peripheral vascular disease journals to determine what types of figures are used, and to assess the prevalence of suboptimal data visualization practices. Among papers with data figures, 47.7% of papers used bar graphs to present continuous data. This primer provides a detailed overview of strategies for addressing this issue by (1) outlining strategies for selecting the correct type of figure depending on the study design, sample size, and the type of variable; (2) examining techniques for making effective dot plots, box plots, and violin plots; and (3) illustrating how to avoid sending mixed messages by aligning the figure structure with the study design and statistical analysis. We also present solutions to other common problems identified in the systematic review. Resources include a list of free tools and templates that authors can use to create more informative figures and an online simulator that illustrates why summary statistics are meaningful only when there are enough data to summarize. Last, we consider steps that investigators can take to improve figures in the scientific literature.
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.