ArticleBiophysical reviews2021
Biophysical reviews-providing an effective critique.
Article in Biophysical reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practical measures for achieving greater alignment between scientific practice and meaningful research output.Biophysical reviews · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This Editorial for Volume 13, Issue 4 of Biophysical Reviews begins with an introduction to the invited Review contributed by the 2021 winner of "The Michèle Auger Award for Young Scientists' Independent Research" (Assoc. Prof. Jorge Alegre-Cebollada). After providing a short summary of the other articles contained within the Issue, we discuss some additional matters important to the journal and its readers. In particular, this Editorial describes ongoing preparations for the upcoming IUPAB World Congress (October 4th-8th); it introduces two new Executive Editors from the UK and Spain; it describes the journal's placement in the latest SCIMago journal rankings, and it explains a new feature of the journal-"The Biophysical Reviews Historical Top Five". This piece closes with some thoughts about what might constitute a constructive critique of a manuscript.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.