The best time to argue about what a replication means? Before you do 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

1. Investigating the replicability of preclinical cancer biology.eLife · 2021
   Pooled it
2. A framework for assessing the trustworthiness of scientific research findings.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
   Article
3. CheckMyMetal (CMM): validating metal-binding sites in X-ray and cryo-EM data.IUCrJ · 2024
   Article
4. Effects of the Generic Masculine and Its Alternatives in Germanophone Countries: A Multi-Lab Replication and Extension of Stahlberg, Sczesny, and Braun (2001).International review of social psychology · 2024
   Article
5. Epidemiological characteristics and prevalence rates of research reproducibility across disciplines: A scoping review of articles published in 2018-2019.eLife · 2023
   Article
6. Establishing ground truth in the traumatic brain injury literature: if replication is the answer, then what are the questions?Brain communications · 2023
   Review
7. CMM-An enhanced platform for interactive validation of metal binding sites.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2023
   Article
8. How failure to falsify in high-volume science contributes to the replication crisis.eLife · 2022
   Article
9. Challenges for assessing replicability in preclinical cancer biology.eLife · 2021
   Article
10. Science, misinformation and digital technology during the Covid-19 pandemic.History and philosophy of the life sciences · 2021
    Article
11. Response by Dichek to Letter Regarding Article, "Jugular Vein Injection of High-Titer Lentiviral Vectors Does Not Transduce the Aorta".Arteriosclerosis, thrombosis, and vascular biology · 2021
    Article
12. Improving preclinical studies through replications.eLife · 2021
    Article

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

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as