ArticleBiophysical reviews2022
Biophysical Reviews: Publishing short and critical reviews written by key figures in the field.
Article in Biophysical reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practical measures for achieving greater alignment between scientific practice and meaningful research output.Biophysical reviews · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Biophysical Reviews: Publishing short and critical reviews written by key figures in the field.Biophysical reviews · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This Editorial for Issue 5 (Vol. 14 2022) of Biophysical Reviews begins with a short note of commemoration for the journal's founding chief editor Jean Garnier (1929-2022) who sadly passed away this month. Following this is a precis of the current Issue contents that begins with an introduction of the prizewinning article by Assoc. Prof. Miho Yanagisawa, winner of the 2022 Michèle Auger Award for Young Scientists' Independent Research. This Editorial concludes with a brief and somewhat subjective discussion of what features do and don't, help to make for a 'good journal'.
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.