Perceived information gain from randomized trials correlates with publication in high–impact factor journals is a research paper published in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (2012). On theSindex it has a DataRank of 3.0. It has been cited 42 times, with 30 citing works in its 1-hop citation network.
ObjectiveTo examine whether perceived information gain (IG) drives the publication of randomized trials in high-impact factor (IF) journals.Study design and settingWe estimated IG as the Kullback-Leibler divergence, quantifying how much a new finding changes established knowledge. We used 67 meta-analyses (964 randomized trials) that include one or more trials from any of the three highest IF general medical journals (NEJM, JAMA, and Lancet). We calculated IG for the presence of a non-null effect (IG(1)) and IG for the effect size magnitude (IG(2)).ResultsAcross meta-analyses, the summary correlation coefficient of IF was 0.23 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.14, 0.31) for IG(1) and 0.35 (95% CI: 0.25, 0.46) for IG(2). IF also correlated with the P-value of the results (r=0.18), order of publication (r=-0.13), and number of events in the trial (r=0.36). Multivariate regression including IG, order of publication, P-value, and the number of events showed that IG is an independent correlate of IF. IG(2) explained a substantially larger proportion of the variance in IF than IG(1).ConclusionPublication in journals with high IF is driven by how extensively the results of a study change prior perceptions of the evidence, independently of the statistical significance and size of the study.
FAIR checklist signals are shown for context only and do not affect DataRank scoring.
Base Score Contribution
0.564
From this paper's citation signal
Citation Network Contribution
2.4
From 25 citing papers with measurable signal
Ranked by citation count — the same ordering the engine uses when summing log1p(Cq) over citers.
DataRank blends this paper's own citation count with the influence of the papers that cite it. Here, roughly 19% comes from its base citations and 81% from the citation network (25 citing papers contributed measurable signal).
Citers are pulled from OpenAlex sorted by cited_by_count:descand capped per paper, so when the cap binds we keep the highest-signal references and the score is reproducible across reruns.
Click a node to highlight its connections. Use scroll to zoom. Drag to pan.