Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38418530›Full record

ArticleNPJ precision oncology2024

All models are wrong and yours are useless: making clinical prediction models impactful for patients.

Florian Markowetz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Genomics and Multi-Omics to Guide Clinical Management in Thyroid Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Prediction of individualised 6-month mortality risk in opioid use disorder.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

1 author.

Florian MarkowetzCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. florian.markowetz@cruk.cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2784-5308

Funding

Cancer Research UK (CRUK) C14303/A17197
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Identifiers

PMID38418530
PMCPMC10901807

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.