ReviewClinical rheumatology2020
Integrity of clinical research conduct, reporting, publishing, and post-publication promotion in rheumatology.
Review in Clinical rheumatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Reporting of Research Ethics in Studies Focusing on Foot Health in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis - A Systematic Review.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHREPooled it
- A literature review of non-financial conflicts of interest in healthcare research and publication.BMC medical ethics · 2025Review
- A case report of ineffective immunosuppressive therapy for MDA5 related clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis during pregnancy and literature review.Gynecology and pelvic medicine · 2025Article
- Ethics statements in Rheumatology journals: present practices and future directions.Rheumatology international · 2024Article
- Awareness and knowledge of manuscript writing and research integrity: A cross sectional survey among graduate students.Heliyon · 2022Article
- Committee on High-quality Alzheimer's Disease Studies (CHADS) consensus report.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2022Article
- Formulating Hypotheses for Different Study Designs.Journal of Korean medical science · 2021Review
- Review
- Peer Reviewers in Central Asia: Publons Based Analysis.Journal of Korean medical science · 2021Article
- A reality check on publishing integrity tools in biomedical science.Clinical rheumatology · 2021Article
- Present-day tools for assessing publishing integrity in biomedical science represent valuable work in progress.Clinical rheumatology · 2021Article
- Plagiarism detection and prevention: a primer for researchers.Reumatologia · 2021Article
- Peer review guidance: a primer for researchers.Reumatologia · 2021Article
- Statistical data presentation: a primer for rheumatology researchers.Rheumatology international · 2021Review
- Scholarly publishing and journal targeting in the time of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: a cross-sectional survey of rheumatologists and other specialists.Rheumatology international · 2020Article
- Letter to the Editor: Social Media Is a Double-Edged Sword in the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of Korean medical science · 2020Article
- Scientific authorship: a primer for researchers.Reumatologia · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The number of rheumatology journals, and papers related to this specialty, is expanding every day. Careful consideration for ethical aspects of such published work is mandatory for authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and all stakeholders. Recent instances of lack of appropriate research ethics committee overview, or participant consent for inclusion in the research study, or a case report, resulting in retractions, emphasize the need for greater awareness regarding these ethical aspects. Authors should strive to avoid redundancy, especially for review articles, both systematic and narrative. Clinical trial registration before commencing enrolment is mandatory as per contemporary norms. Transparent declaration of authorship contributions as well as appropriate attribution of authorship are recommended, since these may help avoid subsequent authorship conflicts. Authors, reviewers, and editors should disclose conflicts of interest, both financial and non-financial. Unbiased peer review is a critical part of editorial decision making; recent instances of peer review fraud have resulted in numerous retractions of scientific papers. Any reproduction of text, figures, or tables should be with due attribution to source, and after seeking permission of the copyright holder. Citations to published work should be relevant and diverse. Research assessment should rely on the assessment of quality of published work, rather than mere citation analyses. Authors should beware predatory, low-quality journals, and utilize social media channels to ethically promote their research with due consideration to privacy and copyright. Rheumatology societies should collaborate to develop guidelines for ethical research reporting, and educate young scientists regarding these principles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32026178What 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.