ArticlePLoS biology2025
More science friction for less science fiction.
Article in PLoS biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying new threats to health and biomedical literature integrity from rapidly scaled publications and problematic research.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2026Article
- Dramatic increases in redundant publications in the Generative AI era.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Journal of Global Health's Guidelines for Reporting Analyses of Big Data Repositories Open to the Public (GRABDROP): preventing 'paper mills', duplicate publications, misuse of statistical inference, and inappropriate use of artificial intelligence.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- A scientific future shared with AI.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- NHANES Sleep Research as a Cautionary Tale: When Big Data Goes Wrong.Nature and science of sleep · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AI-ready health datasets can be exploited to generate many research articles with potentially limited scientific value. A study in PLOS Biology highlights this problem, by describing a recent, sudden explosion in papers analyzing the NHANES health dataset.
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.