ArticleNature reviews. Clinical oncology2021
Author Correction: COVID-19 vaccine guidance for patients with cancer participating in oncology clinical trials.
Article in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- COVID-19 and Cancer: A Comparison of the Two Important Pandemic Waves in an Indian Cancer Patients' Cohort.South Asian journal of cancer · 2024Article
- Development of an integrated and comprehensive clinical trial process management system.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- Safety of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines in Patients with Cancer Enrolled in Early-Phase Clinical Trials.Cancers · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum for
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.