Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40177472›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2025

Why is it important to implement meta-research in universities and institutes with medical research activities?

Ivan David Lozada-Martinez, Dionicio Neira-Rodado, Darly Martinez-Guevara, Hary Salome Cruz-Soto, Maria Paula Sanchez-Echeverry, Yamil Liscano

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Colombian Medical Cannabis Paradox: A Scoping Review of Structural Barriers and Health Inequity.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ivan David Lozada-MartinezBiomedical Scientometrics and Evidence-Based Research Unit, Department of Health Sciences, Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla, Colombia.
Dionicio Neira-RodadoUniversidad de la Costa, Barranquilla, Colombia.
Darly Martinez-GuevaraGrupo de Investigación en Salud Integral (GISI), Departamento Facultad de Salud, Universidad Santiago de Cali, Cali, Colombia.
Hary Salome Cruz-SotoGrupo de Investigación en Salud Integral (GISI), Departamento Facultad de Salud, Universidad Santiago de Cali, Cali, Colombia.
Maria Paula Sanchez-EcheverryGrupo de Investigación en Salud Integral (GISI), Departamento Facultad de Salud, Universidad Santiago de Cali, Cali, Colombia.
Yamil LiscanoGrupo de Investigación en Salud Integral (GISI), Departamento Facultad de Salud, Universidad Santiago de Cali, Cali, Colombia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a growing concern over questionable practices and a lack of rigor in scientific activities, particularly in health and medical sciences. Universities and research institutes are key players in the development of science, technology, and innovation. Academic institutions, whose primary mission is to generate and disseminate knowledge, bear the responsibility in many parts of the world to act as consultants and guardians of scientific integrity in health research. Then, universities and research institutes must act as guardians of the research and technological development process, utilizing methodological and operational evaluation tools to validate the rigor and quality of medical research. Meta-research is defined as the research of research itself. Some of the most important specific objectives of meta-research include the assessment of research relevance, the evaluation of evidence validity, and the exploration of scientific integrity. A significant portion of evidence in the medical and health sciences literature has been found to be redundant, misleading, or inconsistent. Although this issue is of great importance in global health, discussions about practical and tangible solutions remain fragmented and limited. The aim of this manuscript is to highlight the significance of employing meta-research within universities and research institutes as a tool to monitor scientific rigor and promote responsible practices in medical research.

Indexed as

biomedical researchevidence gapsknowledge discoverymeta-researchneeds assessmentpublications

Identifiers

PMID40177472
PMCPMC11962015

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.