ArticleiScience2022
Patterns of basic knowledge.
Article in iScience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epistemetrics, a discipline concerning measuring knowledge qualitative and quantitatively, is an under developed area of research. A primary reason for the current status is a perceived lack of a formal structure of knowledge. In particular, a number of fundamental questions about knowledge remain to be answered: What is the basic unit of knowledge? How many types of knowledge are there? How do they relate to each other? And what are the hierarchies of knowledge? To address these questions, we proposed a knowledge categorization system, the EApc framework. The present work collects further evidence, from theories and practices of several diverse research disciplines, to argue for, to refine, and to expand the EApc framework. This framework can provide new perspectives in understanding scientific processes and in assessing values and impacts of research proposals and products. It may also shed light on the mechanisms of human cognition and information processing.
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.