Free Access
Editorial
Issue
J Extra Corpor Technol
Volume 53, Number 4, December 2021
Page(s) 239 - 244
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/ject/202153239
Published online 15 December 2021
  1. Roser M, Ortiz-Ospina E, Ritchie H. Life Expectancy, Our World in Data, 2013. Available at: https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy. Accessed September 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  2. Cutler D, Deaton A, Lleras-Muney A. The determinants of mortality. J Econ Perspect. 2006;20:97–120. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Orenstein WA, Seib K, Graham-Rowe D, Berkley S, Contemporary vaccine challenges: Improving global health one shot at a time. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6:253ps11. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. WHO and UNICEF Warn of a Decline in Vaccinations during COVID-19. World Health Organisation News, 15 July 2020. Available at: https://www.who.int/news/item/15-07-2020-who-and-unicef-warn-of-a-decline-in-vaccinations-during-covid-19. Accessed September 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  5. Zimmer C, Corum J, Sui-Lee W. New York Times Coronavirus Vaccine Tracker. The New York Times, 2021. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/science/coronavirus-vaccine-tracker.html. Accessed September 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  6. Coronavirus Resource Center. Johns Hopkins University and Medicine, 2021. Available at: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu. Accessed September 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  7. COVID-19 Could Push up to 175 Million People into Extreme Poverty, Expert Warns Third Committee, amid Calls for Repairing Entrenched Social Inequities. United Nations Press Release, October 21, 2020. United Nations, General Assembly, Third Committee. Available at: https://www.un.org/press/en/2020/gasch4299.doc.htm. Accessed September 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  8. Offit PA. The cutter incident, 50 years later. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1411–2. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. McLintic A. The motivations behind science denial. N Z Med J. 2019;132:88–94. [Google Scholar]
  10. Nyhan B, Reifler J, Richey S, Freed GL. Effective messages in vaccine promotion: A randomized trial. Pediatrics. 2014;133:e835–42. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Wikipedia contributors. Not even wrong, May 27, 2021. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Not_even_wrong&oldid=1025403958. Accessed September 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  12. Pearl J, Mackenzie D. The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect, 1st ed. New York: Basic Books; 2018. [Google Scholar]
  13. Naci H, Davis C, Savovic J, et al. Design characteristics, risk of bias, and reporting of randomised controlled trials supporting approvals of cancer drugs by European Medicines Agency, 2014-16: Cross sectional analysis. BMJ. 2019;366:l5221. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Bertaggia L, Baiardo Redaelli M, Lembo R, et al. The fragility index in peri-operative randomised trials that reported significant mortality effects in adults. Anaesthesia. 2019;74:1057–60. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Teixeira PM. p-Hacking - A call for ethics. Pulmonology. 2018;24:207–8. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Trinquart L, Dunn AG, Bourgeois FT. Registration of published randomized trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med. 2018;16:173. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: Comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004;291:2457–65. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Wiebe J, Detten G, Scheckel C, et al. The heart of the matter: Outcome reporting bias and registration status in cardio-thoracic surgery. Int J Cardiol. 2017;227:299–304. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Chong SW, Collins NF, Wu CY, Liskaser GM, Peyton PJ. The relationship between study findings and publication outcome in anesthesia research: A retrospective observational study examining publication bias. Can J Anaesth. 2016;63:682–90. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Piller C, Servick C. Two Elite Medical Journals Retract Coronavirus Papers over Data Integrity Questions. Science Magazine, June 4, 2020. Available at: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/two-elite-medical-journals-retract-coronavirus-papers-over-data-integrity-questions. Accessed September 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  21. Carlisle JB. Data fabrication and other reasons for non-random sampling in 5087 randomised, controlled trials in anaesthetic and general medical journals. Anaesthesia. 2017;72:944–52. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Else H, Van Noorden R. The fight against fake-paper factories that churn out sham science. Nature. 2021;591:516–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Normile D. China Cracks Down after Investigation Finds Massive Peer-Review Fraud. Science Magazine, July 31, 2017. Available at: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/07/china-cracks-down-after-investigation-finds-massive-peer-review-fraud. Accessed September 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  24. Grudniewicz A, Moher D, Cobey KD, et al. Predatory journals: No definition, no defence. Nature. 2019;576:210–2. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Schroter S, Black N, Evans S, Godlee F, Osorio L, Smith R. What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them? J R Soc Med. 2008;101:507–14. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Sidebotham D. Understanding significance testing. Anaesthesia. 2021 (In press). doi: 10.1111/anae.15591. [Google Scholar]
  27. Aberegg SK, Richards DR, O’Brien JM. Delta inflation: A bias in the design of randomized controlled trials in critical care medicine. Crit Care. 2010;14:R77. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Sidebotham D, Popovich I, Lumley T. A Bayesian analysis of mortality outcomes in multicentre trials in critical care. Br J Anaesth. 2021;127:487–94. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  29. Spence J, Ioannidis JPA, Avidan MS. Achieving balance with power: Lessons from the balanced anaesthesia study. Br J Anaesth. 2020;124:366–70. [Google Scholar]
  30. Sidebotham D. Are most randomised trials in anaesthesia and critical care wrong? An analysis using Bayes’ theorem. Anaesthesia. 2020;75;1386–93. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Ioannidis JP. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005;2:e124. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. Halsey LG, Curran-Everett D, Vowler SL, Drummond GB. The fickle P value generates irreproducible results. Nat Methods. 2015;12:179–85. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. Ioannidis JP. Failure to replicate: Sound the alarm. Cerebrum November 2, 2015. Available at: https://ddec1-0-en-ctp.trendmicro.com:443/wis/clicktime/v1/query?url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.dana.org%%2farticle%2ffailure%2dto%2dreplicate%2dsound%2dthe%2dalarm%2f&umid=42778142-c385-43cd-80ba-910cec68acb7&auth=bf59cb4520f38a31222422d8c17c158c7849ac86-ad882b3e5ebd84e57750edf79bb95dbce946026b. Accessed September 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  34. Open Science Collaboration. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science. 2015;349:aac4716. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Torjesen I. COVID-19: Risk of cerebral blood clots from disease is 10 times that from vaccination, study finds. BMJ. 2021;373:n1005. [Google Scholar]
  36. Venkatesh B, Finfer S, Cohen J, et al. Adjunctive glucocorticoid therapy in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:797–808. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Hanson NA, Lavallee MB, Thiele RH. Apophenia and anesthesia: How we sometimes change our practice prematurely. Can J Anaesth. 2021;68:1185–96. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Glance LG, Kellermann AL, Hannan EL, et al. The impact of anesthesiologists on coronary artery bypass graft surgery outcomes. Anesth Analg. 2015;120:526–33. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Yeager T, Roy S. Evolution of gas permeable membranes for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Artif Organs. 2017;41:700–9. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.