Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8182120›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of clinical investigation1994

Chance, concurrence, and clustering. Analysis of reviewers' recommendations on 1,000 submissions to the Journal of Clinical Investigation.

B F Scharschmidt, A DeAmicis, P Bacchetti, M J Held

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of clinical investigation, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Effective Peer Review: Who, Where, or What?JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2022
    Article
  2. JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2021
    Article
  3. Effect of recommendations from reviewers suggested or excluded by authors.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2011
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Fraud and misconduct in science: the stem cell seduction: Implications for the peer-review process.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2009
    Article
  7. Reviewing scientific papers.Archives of disease in childhood · 1995
    Article
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

4 authors.

B F ScharschmidtDepartment of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco 94143.
A DeAmicis
P Bacchetti
M J Held

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Manuscripts, Medical as TopicPeer Review, ResearchPeriodicals as TopicSocieties, ScientificStatistics as Topic

Identifiers

PMID8182120
PMCPMC294293

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.