ArticleActa pharmaceutica Sinica. B2023
Erratum: Author correction to "The FAP
Article in Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- MRI-based intratumoral and peritumoral radiomics predicting neoadjuvant chemotherapy response in osteosarcoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum forThe FAP2022
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.apsb.2021.08.015.].
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.