Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Almost all articles on cancer prognostic markers report statistically significant results

14 references·16 citing·44 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

2005Why Most Published Research Findings Are False10,471 cited
1991Publication bias in clinical research3,110 cited
2005Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK)2,148 cited
2004Empirical Evidence for Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized Trials1,845 cited
1998Meta-analysis Spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies997 cited
1992Factors Influencing Publication of Research Results853 cited
2001Systematic reviews of evaluations of prognostic variables757 cited
2007An exploratory test for an excess of significant findings751 cited
2019Why Most Published Research Findings Are False463 cited
2004Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research442 cited
2004Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors408 cited
2005REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK)312 cited
2004Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound prognostic studies in MEDLINE: an analytic survey291 cited
2005Selective Reporting Biases in Cancer Prognostic Factor Studies231 cited

Cited by

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

2007

Persistence of Contradicted Claims in the Literature

227 cited

2013Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis for a Binary Outcome: One-Stage or Two-Stage?201 cited

2012Publication of Tumor Marker Research Results: The Necessity for Complete and Transparent Reporting185 cited

2010Evaluating the Quality of Research into a Single Prognostic Biomarker: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 83 Studies of C-Reactive Protein in Stable Coronary Artery Disease161 cited

2009Prognostic markers in cancer: the evolution of evidence from single studies to meta-analysis, and beyond161 cited

2009Ten steps towards improving prognosis research160 cited

2014Improving the Transparency of Prognosis Research: The Role of Reporting, Data Sharing, Registration, and Protocols152 cited

2011STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology – Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME): An Extension of the STROBE Statement129 cited

2009Reporting of prognostic studies of tumour markers: a review of published articles in relation to REMARK guidelines122 cited

2009Synthesis of observational studies should consider credibility ceilings107 cited

2016Reporting of Positive Results in Randomized Controlled Trials of Mindfulness-Based Mental Health Interventions107 cited

2012Evaluation of Excess Statistical Significance in Meta-analyses of 98 Biomarker Associations with Cancer Risk93 cited

2011Strengthening the Reporting of Genetic Risk Prediction Studies: The GRIPS Statement88 cited

2012Individual participant data meta-analysis of prognostic factor studies: state of the art?83 cited

2011Prognostic effect size of cardiovascular biomarkers in datasets from observational studies versus randomised trials: meta-epidemiology study80 cited

2015A surge of p -values between 0.041 and 0.049 in recent decades (but negative results are increasing rapidly too)78 cited