More medical journals should inform their contributors about three key principles of graph construction
- 31 October 2006
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Vol. 59 (10) , 1017.e1-1017.e8
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.12.016
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- Null bar and null zone are better than the error bar to compare group means in graphsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2004
- Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD InitiativeAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2003
- The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized TrialsAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2001
- Making Sense of Graphs: Critical Factors Influencing Comprehension and Instructional ImplicationsJournal for Research in Mathematics Education, 2001
- Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in EpidemiologyA Proposal for ReportingJAMA, 2000
- Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statementThe Lancet, 1999
- How are graphs read? An indication of sequenceBehavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 1998
- Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statementJAMA, 1996
- Understanding charts and graphsApplied Cognitive Psychology, 1989
- Spacing of repetitions in the incidental and intentional free recall of pictures and wordsJournal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1974