Cited by 1,405Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesHealth Policy Implementation Science

Pragmatic Trials

Open access
Ford, Ian, Norrie, John·2016·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

No abstract available.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmra1510059

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ford, I., & Norrie, J.
Affiliations
University of Aberdeen (GB)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2016-08-04
Volume
375
Issue
5
Pages
454-463
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W4205374244
Cited by
1,405
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 133 · 2025: 159 · 2024: 160 · 2023: 131 · 2022: 153 · 2021: 152 · 2020: 172 · 2019: 139 · 2018: 109 · 2017: 85 · 2016: 12
FWCI
116.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Medical Research Council (MC_PC_13040, MR/K007017/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
pragmatic trials, clinical trial design
MeSH terms
Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Patient Selection, Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review