ArticleEnvironmental research2023
Scientific evidence on the origin of SARS-CoV-2.
Article in Environmental research, 2023. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Even reaching the end of the year 2022, there is still a controversy on the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This Virtual Special Issue (VSI), focused on the "Scientific evidence on the origin of SARS-CoV-2", was launched some months ago with the aim of stimulating the submission of new high quality scientific research papers on the matter, to shed light on it. As indicated in the call for papers, the Editors involved in the VSI were aware of the difficulties of presenting concluding facts on that issue, however, bearing in mind that some teams of researchers had started investigations regarding this subject, a VSI like this (searching for stimulating the scientific controversy while requiring scientific evidence), could help to elucidate complicated aspects, going a step ahead in this way. The Editors made a call encouraging interested teams of researchers having solid results to submit high quality manuscripts dealing with this crucial theme. We thought -and we still think-that it is of maximum interest for the scientific community, as well as for the whole society, now and probably for the future. The VSI have received 50 submissions, which could be considered a limited number highlighting the difficulties of elaborating new high-quality manuscripts providing solid evidence on the matter. After a careful peer-review, those manuscripts considered to reach the highest scientific value were accepted for publication. The Editors think that the set of papers included in this VSI constitute interesting and high-quality contributions, providing further scientific knowledge on this issue. In this editorial piece, the Editors make some comments on the papers published, including some additional reflections.
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.