ArticleJAMA network open2022
Characteristics of Retracted Research Articles About COVID-19 vs Other Topics.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Blind Trust in Hospital Data Warehouses: Evaluating Real-World Data Accountability.Learning health systems · 2026Article
- Characteristics of retracted biomedical research papers from Latin American institutions.Revista de saude publica · 2025Article
- The epidemiology of errors in data capture, management, and analysis: A scoping review of retracted articles and retraction notices in clinical and translational research.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Does haste make waste? Prevalence and types of errors reported after publication of studies of COVID-19 therapeutics.Systematic reviews · 2023Review
- Responsible conduct of research: Preparedness for times of crisis.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Characteristics of retracted research papers before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Trends and Characteristics of Retracted Articles in the Smoking Field: An Observational Study.Open respiratory archivesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.