ArticleActa informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH2020
Evaluation of Preclinical and Clinical Studies Published in Medical Journals of Bosnia and Herzegovina: Methodology Issues.
Article in Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH, 2020. 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.
- Medical Archives/Medicinski Arhiv/Archives de Medicine is Finally Indexed in SCOPUS Database.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2022Article
- Operation of Medical Journal Citation Databases Without Control. Dilemma: Are They What They Want to Be in the Eyes of Scientific Community.Materia socio-medica · 2022Article
- Instead of the Letter to the Editor-Dilemma: Is a New Form of Blackmail Emerging in the World of Scientific Journals Publishing?Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2022Article
- On the Occasion of the Symposium "Scientometry, Citation, Plagiarism and Predatory in Scientific Publishing", Sarajevo, 2021.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2021Article
- Predatory Journals and Publishers - Dilemmas: How to Assess it and How to Avoid it?Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2021Article
- Inflated Co-authorship Introduces Bias to Current Scientometric Indices.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2021Article
- Comparative Analysis of Web of Science and Pubmed Indexed Medical Journals Published in Former Yugoslav Countries.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2020Article
- Methodological Errors in Clinical Studies Published by Medical Journals of Ex-Yugoslav Countries.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2020Article
- Unethical Behaviors of Authors Who Published Papers in the Biomedical Journals Became a Global Problem.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 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
introductionResults of preclinical and clinical studies in medicine could be trusted only if their design and statistical analysis were appropriate.
aimThe aim of our study was to investigate whether preclinical and clinical studies published in medical journals of Bosnia and Herzegovina satisfy basic requirements for appropriate design and statistical interpretation of data.
methodsPreclinical and clinical studies published in medical journals of Bosnia and Herzegovina were retrieved from the PubMed database, and the sample for analysis was randomly chosen from the retrieved publications. Implementation rate of basic principles of experimental design (local control, randomization and replication) and rate of the most common errors in design of clinical/observational studies was established by careful reading of the sampled publications and their checking against predefined criteria.
resultsOur study showed that only a minority of experimental preclinical studies had basic principles of design completely implemented (7%), while implementation rate of single aspects of appropriate experimental design varied from as low as 12% to as high as 77%. Only one of the clinical/observational studies had none of the errors searched for (2%), and specific errors rates varied from 10% to 89%. Average impact factor of the surveyed studies was around one, and average publication date recent, less than 5 years ago.
conclusionPrevalence of preclinical studies that did not follow completely basic principles of research design, and that of clinical/observational studies with errors are high, raising suspicion to validity of their results. If incorrect and not protected against bias, results of published studies may adversely influence future research.
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.