ArticleAnnals of the rheumatic diseases1996
The misconduct of redundant publication.
Article in Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on good publication practice.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2000Guideline
- Challenges and opportunities for imaging journals: emerging from the shadows.Skeletal radiology · 2011Review
- Duplicate publication and 'paper inflation' in the Fractals literature.Science and engineering ethics · 2006Article
- Authors and publication practices.Science and engineering ethics · 2006Article
- Consensus and contention regarding redundant publications in clinical research: cross-sectional survey of editors and authors.Journal of medical ethics · 2003Article
- Anti-TNFalpha: a new dimension in the pharmacotherapy of the spondyloarthropathies !?Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2000Article
- From nottingham to nijmegenAnnals of the rheumatic diseases · 1999Article
- Dealing with research misconduct in the United Kingdom. An American perspective on research integrity.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1998Article
- Research misconduct.Gut · 1997Article
- Ethics in Research and Publication.Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric SurgeonsReview
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.