IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/0040034.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Authors, Ghosts, Damned Lies, and Statisticians

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth Wager

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth Wager, 2007. "Authors, Ghosts, Damned Lies, and Statisticians," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(1), pages 1-2, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:0040034
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040034
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040034
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040034&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040034?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter C Gøtzsche & Asbjørn Hróbjartsson & Helle Krogh Johansen & Mette T Haahr & Douglas G Altman & An-Wen Chan, 2007. "Ghost Authorship in Industry-Initiated Randomised Trials," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(1), pages 1-6, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    2. Unruh, Lynn & Rice, Thomas & Rosenau, Pauline Vaillancourt & Barnes, Andrew J., 2016. "The 2013 cholesterol guideline controversy: Would better evidence prevent pharmaceuticalization?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(7), pages 797-808.
    3. Jonathan M. Levitt & Mike Thelwall, 2016. "Long term productivity and collaboration in information science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1103-1117, September.
    4. The PLoS Medicine Editors, 2009. "Ghostwriting: The Dirty Little Secret of Medical Publishing That Just Got Bigger," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-2, September.
    5. Marc-André Gagnon & Joel Lexchin, 2008. "The Cost of Pushing Pills: A New Estimate of Pharmaceutical Promotion Expenditures in the United States," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(1), pages 1-5, January.
    6. Simon Stern & Trudo Lemmens, 2011. "Legal Remedies for Medical Ghostwriting: Imposing Fraud Liability on Guest Authors of Ghostwritten Articles," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-5, August.
    7. John P A Ioannidis, 2008. "Measuring Co-Authorship and Networking-Adjusted Scientific Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(7), pages 1-8, July.
    8. Thelwall, Mike & Sud, Pardeep, 2016. "National, disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact: Evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 48-61.
    9. Salandra, Rossella, 2018. "Knowledge dissemination in clinical trials: Exploring influences of institutional support and type of innovation on selective reporting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1215-1228.
    10. Sismondo, Sergio, 2008. "How pharmaceutical industry funding affects trial outcomes: Causal structures and responses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1909-1914, May.
    11. John M McPartland, 2009. "Obesity, the Endocannabinoid System, and Bias Arising from Pharmaceutical Sponsorship," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(3), pages 1-7, March.
    12. Ana Marušić & Lana Bošnjak & Ana Jerončić, 2011. "A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-1, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:0040034. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.