Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38374676›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of medical ethics

If you can't fix the problem change the standards.

Siddharth Joshi, Veena Shatrugna

Abstract readEditorialComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of medical ethics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Siddharth JoshiIndependent Researcher, Bengaluru, INDIA.
Veena ShatrugnaFormer Deputy Director, National Institute of Nutrition, Hyderabad; Indepedent Researcher, Bengaluru, INDIA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last few months, established data systems in India have been the target of heated dispute, chiefly by members of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister, ranging from the inflation numbers [1], to the sampling frame for surveys done by the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSS), the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) and the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS)[2], haemoglobin cut-offs for anaemia [3] and childhood growth standards, female labour force participation rate and life expectancy at birth [4]. The attempts to revise economic data systems has invited a raging debate [5, 6], prompting the government to set up a panel to review the NSS's methodology. However, the arguments being made in favor of downward revision of nutritional standards have received much less scrutiny, except for a recent editorial which comments on the general problem of drawing up standards [7]. This is despite the fact that these proposals have already caught the fancy of the government. A policy decision has already been taken to discontinue gathering of data on Hb-levels as part of the quinquennial National Family Health Surveys, which would now be collected as part of a new Dietary and Bio-markers Survey. Neither the rationale for such a move, nor the details of the methodology of the new survey, or the time-frame within which such data would be released have been made available for public deliberation. Similarly, discussions have been initiated on devising "indigenous" growth standards for children [8]. Hence, it becomes imperative to examine the basis of these renewed calls for revision of existing standards.

Indexed as

Data SystemsEmploymentFemaleHumansIndiaLife ExpectancyReference StandardsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID38374676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.