Apparatus for determination of small quantities of radium
Clicks: 2
ID: 302868
1941
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
0.3
/100
2 views
1 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #6,255 of 8,486 articles by views in american journal of science
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 8,486 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Despite evidence of selective outcome reporting across multiple disciplines, this has not yet been assessed in trials studying the effects of exercise in people with cancer. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to explore prospectively registered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in exercise oncology for evidence of selective outcome reporting.Methods
Eligible trials were RCTs that 1) investigated the effects of at least partially supervised exercise interventions in people with cancer; 2) were preregistered (i.e. registered before the first patient was recruited) on a clinical trials registry; and 3) reported results in a peer-reviewed published manuscript. We searched the PubMed database from the year of inception to September 2020 to identify eligible exercise oncology RCTs clinical trial registries. Eligible trial registrations and linked published manuscripts were compared to identify the proportion of sufficiently preregistered outcomes reported correctly in the manuscripts, and cases of outcome omission, switching, and silently introduction of non-novel outcomes.Results
We identified 31 eligible RCTs and 46 that were ineligible due to retrospective registration. Of the 405 total prespecified outcomes across the 31 eligible trials, only 6.2% were preregistered complete methodological detail. Only 16% (n=148/929) of outcomes reported in published results manuscripts were linked with sufficiently preregistered outcomes without outcome switching. We found 85 total cases of outcome switching. A high proportion (41%) of preregistered outcomes were omitted from the published results manuscripts, and many published outcomes (n=394; 42.4%) were novel outcomes that had been silently introduced (median, min-max=10, 0-50 per trial). We found no examples of preregistered efficacy outcomes that were measured, assessed, and analysed as planned.Conclusions
We found evidence suggestive of widespread selective outcome reporting and non-reporting bias (outcome switching, omitted preregistered outcomes, and silently introduced novel outcomes). The existence of such reporting discrepancies has implications for the integrity and credibility of RCTs in exercise oncology.Preregistered protocol
https://osf.io/dtkar/ (posted: November 19, 2019)| Reference Key |
openalex_W2328098751
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | W. D. Urry, C. S. Piggot |
| Journal | american journal of science |
| Year | 1941 |
| DOI |
10.2475/ajs.239.9.633
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.