ArticlePloS one2024
Frequency of limitations statements in original research articles of United States leading medical journals: A meta-research protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLimitation declarations are commonly deemed essential to uphold intellectual humility for scientific research, but little has been reported about the limitation statements in published original research articles. This meta-research study aims to investigate the trends of limitation statements among three leading general medical journals in the US.
methodsThis cross-sectional study will compile a data set of full-length original research articles published in the New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association, and Annals of Internal Medicine between 2002 and 2022. Limitation statement will be recognized by two investigators, and a predefined set of sensitive keywords is used for sensitivity analysis. Frequency of limitation statements within the main text of research articles and trends for different study designs, including their association with the corresponding reporting guidelines, are the main measurements. We employ the Cochran-Armitage test for trend analysis.
conclusionThe findings of this study will provide an overview of the limitation statements in leading general medical journals in the US. The results may contribute to future research to identify factors that are associated with the presence of limitation statements.
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.