Well informed uncertainties about the effects of treatments
Open accessAbstract
Risks and benefits of estrogen
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Processes that draw on the 'practical wisdom' of nonscientists have the potential to make scientific discoveries more thoroughly relevant to communities, more directly tailored to the realities of their everyday lives and more consistent with their values.
“Processes that draw on the ‘practical wisdom’ of nonscientists have the potential to make scientific discoveries more thoroughly relevant to communities, more directly tailored to the realities of their everyday lives and more consistent with their values (Chalmers, 2004; Hickey, 2018; Lloyd & White, 2011; Pellicano, 2020).”
From Annual Research Review: Shifting from ‘normal science’ to neurodiversity in autism science (2022) · cites this paper as Chalmers, 2004
In “Well informed uncertainties about the effects of treatments,” Chalmers says patients should help define how to address treatment uncertainties and that researchers should respond to the needs of people using health services. This supports patient involvement in making treatment research more relevant, but the paper does not address nonscientists’ “practical wisdom” or the broader claim about discoveries tailored to communities’ everyday lives and values. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Smith R, Chalmers I. Britain's gift: a "Medline" of synthesised evidence. BMJ 2001;323:1437-1438.
- Ashcroft R. Giving medicine a fair trial. BMJ 2000;320:1686.
- Chalmers I. It's official: evaluative research must become part of routine care in the NHS. J R Soc Med 2000;93:555-6.
- Segelov E, Tattersall MH, Coates AS. Redressing the balance-the ethics of not entering an eligible patient on a randomised clinical trial. Ann Oncol 1992;3:103-5.
- Gillon R. The function of criticism. BMJ 1981;283:1633-9.
- Woods K. Filling the evidence gaps: identifying topics for research in the NHS health technology assessment programme. Clinical Excellence (in press).
- Ogden J, Fuks K, Gardner M, Johnson S, McLean M, Martin P, Shah R. Doctors expressions of uncertainty and patient confidence. Patient Educ Couns 2002;48:171-6.
- Di Blasi Z, Harkness E, Ernst E, Georgiou A, Kleijnen J. Influence of con- text effects on health outcomes: a systematic review. Lancet 2001;357:757- 62.
- Elwyn G. Shared decision making: patient involvement in clinical practice [PhD thesis]. Nijmegen: University of Nijmegen, Netherlands, 2001.
- Feenberg A. On being a human subject: interest and obligation in the experimental treatment of incurable disease. Philosophical Forum 1992;23:213-30.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Annual Research Review: Shifting from ‘normal science’ to neurodiversity in autism science
Pellicano, E., & den Houting, J. (2022) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/jcpp.13534 · Cited by 744 · see citing works
“…‘practical wisdom’ of nonscientists have the potential to make scientific discoveries more thoroughly relevant to communities, more directly tailored to the realities of their everyday lives and more consistent with their values (Chalmers, 2004; Hickey, 2018; Lloyd & White, 2011; Pellicano, 2020).”
BackgroundWhat should autism research focus upon? Community views and priorities from the United Kingdom
Pellicano, E., Dinsmore, A., & Charman, T. (2014) · Autism · doi:10.1177/1362361314529627 · Cited by 800 · see citing works
“This situation is unlike research in other health-related areas (e.g. Chalmers, 2004; Partridge and Scadding, 2004), where there has been some steps towards reforming clinical research decision-making.”
Result
- Authors
- Chalmers, I.
- Affiliations
- James Lind Institute (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Chalmers, Iain
- ORCID
- Chalmers, Iain
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2004-02-26
- Volume
- 328
- Issue
- 7438
- Pages
- 475-476
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- PMC
- PMC351830
- OpenAlex
- W2047544265
- Cited by
- 117
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Medical Research Council
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Menopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Estrogen and related hormone effects
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Keywords
- estrogen, treatment effects, risk-benefit assessment, uncertainty, hormone replacement therapy
- MeSH terms
- Decision Making, Humans, Informed Consent, Truth Disclosure, Treatment Outcome, Uncertainty
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
