ArticleBMJ open2022
Big Data Reality Check (BDRC) for public health: to what extent the environmental health and health services research did meet the 'V' criteria for big data? A study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Methodological Pluralism in Surgical Evidence: from Concept to Practice.Surgery in practice and science · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBig data technologies have been talked up in the fields of science and medicine. The V-criteria (volume, variety, velocity and veracity, etc) for defining big data have been well-known and even quoted in most research articles; however, big data research into public health is often misrepresented due to certain common misconceptions. Such misrepresentations and misconceptions would mislead study designs, research findings and healthcare decision-making. This study aims to identify the V-eligibility of big data studies and their technologies applied to environmental health and health services research that explicitly claim to be big data studies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our protocol follows Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). Scoping review and/or systematic review will be conducted. The results will be reported using PRISMA for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), or PRISMA 2020 and Synthesis Without Meta-analysis guideline. Web of Science, PubMed, Medline and ProQuest Central will be searched for the articles from the database inception to 2021. Two reviewers will independently select eligible studies and extract specified data. The numeric data will be analysed with R statistical software. The text data will be analysed with NVivo wherever applicable. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will review the literature of big data research related to both environmental health and health services. Ethics approval is not required as all data are publicly available and involves confidential personal data. We will disseminate our findings in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021202306.
Indexed as
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.