ArticleCancer medicine2024
RETRACTION: Long Noncoding RNA HCG11 Inhibited Growth and Invasion in Cervical Cancer by Sponging miR-942-5p and Targeting GFI1.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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
- Retraction of
Authors and funding
0 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
retractionY. Zhang, J. Zhang, L. Mao, X. Li, 'Long Noncoding RNA HCG11 Inhibited Growth and Invasion in Cervical Cancer by Sponging miR-942-5p and Targeting GFI1', Cancer Medicine 9, no. 19 (2020): 7062-7071, https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3203. The above article, published online on 13 August 2020 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com), has been retracted by agreement between the journal Editor-in-Chief, Stephen Tait; and John Wiley and Sons Ltd. The retraction has been agreed upon following an investigation into concerns raised by a third party, which revealed an inappropriate duplication of image panels (Figure 2C) between this, and another article published previously by a different group of authors, in a different scientific context. The explanation and the partial raw data shared by the authors was deemed insufficient to address these concerns. The authors' institute has been informed but remained unresponsive. Thus, the editors have lost confidence in the presented data and consider the conclusions of this manuscript substantially compromised.
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.