ReviewJournal of Korean medical science2020
Fundamental Shifts in Research, Ethics and Peer Review in the Era of the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Review in Journal of Korean medical science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Process evaluation of the Hockey Fans in Training lifestyle intervention (for men with overweight or obesity).Translational behavioral medicine · 2025Trial
- Government Initiatives for Research Ethics During COVID-19 Pandemic in Korea.Journal of Korean medical science · 2024Article
- Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Biomedical Publications and Their Citation Frequency.Journal of Korean medical science · 2022Article
- Assessing changes in the food retail environment during the COVID-19 pandemic: opportunities, challenges, and lessons learned.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Climate Donations Inspired by Evidence-Based Fundraising.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- A look-back at convalescent plasma to treat COVID-19.Transfusion and apheresis science : official journal of the World Apheresis Association : official journal of the European Society for Haemapheresis · 2021Article
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 era of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to fundamental shifts in research, ethics, and peer review including reframing of the research design, adapting methodologies to the study type, transitioning of research mechanics, changing research methodologies, overcoming data collection and standardization constraints, upholding research standards and ethics, maintaining informativeness and social value, and providing guarded peer review flexibility. Indeed, the COVID-19 crisis, despite disrupting research worldwide to an unprecedented degree, has also become a catalyst to develop strategies of adaptation to this disruption. As the COVID-19 pandemic continuous to evolve, new, cost-effective, and highly flexible research models need to be developed. Planning is crucial for ensuring short-term and long-term contingency funds to support research logistics and personnel. A mental shift must accompany changes in methodologies to mentor and support researchers who are vital to the continuity of high-caliber research in the long term. A global research perspective through interinstitutional and interprofessional collaboration will sustain adherence to the highest standards of data collection and research reporting.
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.