Why Mayo Clinic Is Embracing the Cloud and What This Means for Clinicians and Researchers.

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.

1. Expanding the boundaries of previously obtained informed consent in research: Views from participants in the Personalised Risk-based Mammascreening study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
   Trial
2. Scientific Evidence for Clinical Text Summarization Using Large Language Models: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025
   Article
3. Global Relevance of Online Health Information Sources: A Case Study of Experiences and Perceptions of Nigerians.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024
   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

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.