Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

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

Experts identified warning signs of fraudulent research: a qualitative study to inform a screening tool

16 references·9 citing·47 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

2007Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups42,389 cited
2014Constructing grounded theory15,747 cited
2003Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers10,543 cited
2014What can “thematic analysis” offer health and wellbeing researchers?3,048 cited
2009How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data1,909 cited
2009The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods1,703 cited
2021Trust in science, social consensus and vaccine confidence323 cited
2021The fight against fake-paper factories that churn out sham science251 cited
2020False individual patient data and zombie randomised controlled trials submitted to Anaesthesia172 cited
2016The GRIM Test127 cited
2020Check for publication integrity before misconduct113 cited
2021Methods to assess research misconduct in health-related research: A scoping review68 cited
2019Semi-automated fact-checking of nucleotide sequence reagents in biomedical research publications: The Seek & Blastn tool55 cited
2020Meet this super-spotter of duplicated images in science papers47 cited

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

2021

Should I include studies from “predatory” journals in a systematic review? Interim guidance for systematic reviewers

44 cited

2021Meta-epidemiological study of publication integrity, and quality of conduct and reporting of randomized trials included in a systematic review of low back pain36 cited

Cited by

2024A call for research to address the threat of paper mills39 cited
2024Enhancing the trustworthiness of pain research: A call to action.29 cited
2025Assessing the feasibility and impact of clinical trial trustworthiness checks via an application to Cochrane Reviews: Stage 2 of the INSPECT-SR project28 cited
2024The Individual Participant Data Integrity Tool for assessing the integrity of randomised trials27 cited
2023Trials We Cannot Trust: Investigating Their Impact on Systematic Reviews and Clinical Guidelines in Spinal Pain26 cited
2026Machine learning based screening of potential paper mill publications in cancer research: methodological and cross sectional study26 cited
2025INSPECT-SR: a tool for assessing trustworthiness of randomised controlled trials15 cited
2024Verification of nucleotide sequence reagent identities in original publications in high impact factor cancer research journals14 cited
2024Rejected papers in academic publishing: Turning negatives into positives to maximize paper acceptance13 cited