Hype, the Responsibility of Authors and Editors, and the Subjective Interpretation of Evidence

Howard Bauchner

6 citations0/0 files storedJAMA Network Open

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Academic Publishing and Open Access Academic Writing and Publishing Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare

Abstract

research.3 It is this last report that is the most important, because PubMed abstracts are available to the public and are used by medical reporters for mainstream media and medical electronic websites such as STAT, Medscape, or Medpage Today.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

References

2010Reporting and Interpretation of Randomized Controlled Trials With Statistically Nonsignificant Results for Primary Outcomes 2022Trends in the Use of Promotional Language (Hype) in Abstracts of Successful National Institutes of Health Grant Applications, 1985-2020 2023Promotional Language (Hype) in Abstracts of Publications of National Institutes of Health–Funded Research, 1985-2020 2022Trends in the Use of Promotional Language (Hype) in National Institutes of Health Funding Opportunity Announcements, 1992-2020 2022The scientific communication ecosystem: the responsibility of investigators

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.