Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31661195›Full record

ArticleJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2019

Ethical guidelines for publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle: update 2019.

Stephan von Haehling, John E Morley, Andrew J S Coats, Stefan D Anker

Abstract readEditorial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 330 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
330citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

330 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Understanding the gut microbiota and sarcopenia: a systematic review.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2021
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

270 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Stephan von HaehlingDepartment of Cardiology and Pneumology, University of Göttingen Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany.
John E MorleyDivisions of Geriatric Medicine and Endocrinology, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Andrew J S CoatsSan Raffaele Pisana Scientific Institute, Rome, Italy.
Stefan D AnkerDepartment of Cardiology (CVK) and Berlin Institute of Health Center for Regenerative Therapies (BCRT), German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK) partner site Berlin, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article details an updated version of the principles of ethical authorship and publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle (JCSM) and its two daughter journals JCSM Rapid Communication and JCSM Clinical Reports. We request of all author sending to the journal a paper for consideration that at the time of submission to JCSM, the corresponding author, on behalf of all co-authors, needs to certify adherence to these principles. The principles are as follows: all authors listed on a manuscript considered for publication have approved its submission and (if accepted) approve publication in JCSM as provided; each named author has made a material and independent contribution to the work submitted for publication; no person who has a right to be recognized as author has been omitted from the list of authors on the submitted manuscript; the submitted work is original and is neither under consideration elsewhere nor that it has been published previously in whole or in part other than in abstract form; all authors certify that the submitted work is original and does not contain excessive overlap with prior or contemporaneous publication elsewhere, and where the publication reports on cohorts, trials, or data that have been reported on before the facts need to be acknowledged and these other publications must be referenced; all original research work has been approved by the relevant bodies such as institutional review boards or ethics committees; all relevant conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, that may affect the authors' ability to present data objectively, and relevant sources of funding of the research in question have been duly declared in the manuscript; the manuscript in its published form will be maintained on the servers of JCSM as a valid publication only as long as all statements in the guidelines on ethical publishing remain true. If any of the aforementioned statements ceases to be true, the authors have a duty to notify as soon as possible the Editors of JCSM, JCSM Rapid Communication, and JCSM Clinical Reports, respectively, so that the available information regarding the published article can be updated and/or the manuscript can be withdrawn.

Indexed as

Guidelines as TopicHumansPublishingEthical guidelinesPublishing

Identifiers

PMID31661195
PMCPMC6818444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.