The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Discrepancies in autologous bone marrow stem cell trials and enhancement of ejection fraction (DAMASCENE): weighted regression and meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether discrepancies in trials of use of bone marrow stem cells in patients with heart disease account for the variation in reported effect size in improvement of left ventricular function. DESIGN: Identification and counting of factual discrepancies in trial reports, and sample size weighted regression against therapeutic effect size. Meta-analysis of trials that provided sufficient information. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Embase from inception to April 2013. ELIGIBILITY FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of autologous bone marrow stem cells for heart disease on mean left ventricular ejection fraction. RESULTS: There were over 600 discrepancies in 133 reports from 49 trials. There was a significant association between the number of discrepancies and the reported increment in EF with bone marrow stem cell therapy (Spearman's r=0.4, P=0.005). Trials with no discrepancies were a small minority (five trials) and showed a mean EF effect size of -0.4%. The 24 trials with 1-10 discrepancies showed a mean effect size of 2.1%. The 12 with 11-20 discrepancies showed a mean effect of size 3.0%. The three with 21-30 discrepancies showed a mean effect size of 5.7%. The high discrepancy group, comprising five trials with over 30 discrepancies each, showed a mean effect size of 7.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Avoiding discrepancies is difficult but is important because discrepancy count is related to effect size. The mechanism is unknown but should be explored in the design of future trials because in the five trials without discrepancies the effect of bone marrow stem cell therapy on ejection fraction is zero.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis
Wickham, H. (2009) · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3 · Cited by 14,447
Bozdogan, H. (1987) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02294361 · Cited by 4,468
Cited by
Cahill, T. J., Choudhury, R. P., & Riley, P. R. (2017) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd.2017.106 · Cited by 312
Denning, C., Borgdorff, V., Crutchley, J., Firth, K. S. A., George, V., Kalra, S., Kondrashov, A., Hoang, M. D., Mosqueira, D., Patel, A., et al. (2016) · Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Cell Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbamcr.2015.10.014 · Cited by 293
“reporting errors) showed positive outcomes, while error-free trials showed no benefit [4].”
ResultAdult Stem Cell Therapy and Heart Failure, 2000 to 2016: A Systematic Review
Nguyen, P. K., Rhee, J.-W., & Wu, J. C. (2016) · JAMA Cardiology · doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2016.2225 · Cited by 299
Sipp, D., Robey, P. G., & Turner, L. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-018-06756-9 · Cited by 285
Translational strategies and challenges in regenerative medicine
Dimmeler, S., Ding, S., Rando, T. A., & Trounson, A. (2014) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/nm.3627 · Cited by 179
Metadata
- Authors
- Nowbar, A. N., Mielewczik, M., Karavassilis, M., Dehbi, H.-M., Shun-Shin, M. J., Jones, S., Howard, J. P., Cole, G. D., Francis, D. P., & on behalf of the DAMASCENE writing group
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2014-04-28
- Volume
- 348
- Issue
- apr28 1
- Pages
- g2688-g2688
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1971076129
- Cited by
- 208
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 45.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Discrepancies in autologous bone marrow stem cell trials and enhancement of ejection fraction (DAMASCENE): weighted regression and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.g2688
- The paper
- Nowbar, A. N., Mielewczik, M., Karavassilis, M., Dehbi, H.-M., Shun-Shin, M. J., Jones, S., Howard, J. P., Cole, G. D., Francis, D. P., & on behalf of the DAMASCENE writing group. (2014). Discrepancies in autologous bone marrow stem cell trials and enhancement of ejection fraction (DAMASCENE): weighted regression and meta-analysis. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g2688
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
