Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35475731›Full record

ArticleeLife2022

Promoting constructive feedback on preprints with the FAST principles.

Sandra Franco Iborra, Jessica Polka, Iratxe Puebla

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sandra Franco IborraASAPbio, San Francisco, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7385-657X
Jessica PolkaASAPbio, San Francisco, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6610-9293
Iratxe PueblaASAPbio, San Francisco, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1258-0746

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ensuring that public feedback on preprints is focused, appropriate, specific and transparent (or FAST) will help to develop a thriving culture for reviewing and commenting on preprints.

Indexed as

Formative FeedbackFeedbackFAST principlespeer reviewpeer review of preprintsPoint of viewpreprints

Identifiers

PMID35475731
PMCPMC9045814

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.