The Hidden Research Paper
Abstract
CONTEXT: To determine whether the views expressed in a research paper are accurate representations of contributors' opinions about the research being reported. METHODS: Purposive sampling of 10 research articles published in The Lancet; qualitative analysis of answers to 6 questions about the meaning of the study put to contributors who were listed on the byline of these articles. Fifty-four contributors listed on the bylines of the 10 articles were evaluated, and answers to questions were compared between contributors within research groups and against the published research report. RESULTS: A total of 36 (67%) of 54 contributors replied to this survey. Important weaknesses were often admitted on direct questioning but were not included in the published article. Contributors frequently disagreed about the importance of their findings, implications, and directions for future research. I could find no effort to study systematically past evidence relating to the investigators' own findings in either survey responses or the published article. Overall, the diversity of contributor opinion was commonly excluded from the published report. I found that discussion sections were haphazardly organized and did not deal systematically with important questions about the study. CONCLUSIONS: A research paper rarely represents the opinions of those scientists whose work it reports. The findings described herein reveal evidence of (self-)censored criticism, obscured meanings, confused assessment of implications, and failures to indicate directions for future research. There is now empirical support for the introduction of structured discussion sections in research papers. Editors might also explore ways to recover the plurality of contributors' opinions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Surveys have found that discussion sections are often dominated by incomplete or biased assessments of the study's results and their implications, and rhetoric supporting the authors' findings.
“Surveys have found that discussion sections are often dominated by incomplete or biased assessments of the study's results and their implications, and rhetoric supporting the authors' findings [ 192 , 193 ].”
From Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration (2007) · cites this paper as [192]
A survey of authors who had published original research articles in The Lancet found that important weaknesses of the study were reported by the investigators in the survey questionnaires, but not in the published article.
“A survey of authors who had published original research articles in The Lancet found that important weaknesses of the study were reported by the investigators in the survey questionnaires, but not in the published article [ 192 ].”
From Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration (2007) · cites this paper as [192]
Cites
Latour, B. (1987) · Cited by 4,106 · see citing works
The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration
Altman, D. G., Schulz, K. F., Moher, D., Egger, M., Davidoff, F., Elbourne, D., Gøtzsche, P. C., Lang, T., & for the CONSORT Group (2001) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-134-8-200104170-00012 · Cited by 3,835 · see citing works
Rennie, D. (1997) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.278.7.579 · Cited by 685 · see citing works
Multicentre Acute Stroke Trial—Italy (MAST-I) Group (1995) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(95)92049-8 · Cited by 635 · see citing works
The case for structuring the discussion of scientific papers
Docherty, M., & Smith, R. (1999) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.318.7193.1224 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
Disclosure of Researcher Contributions: A Study of Original Research Articles in The Lancet
Yank, V. A., & Rennie, D. (1999) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-130-8-199904200-00013 · Cited by 171 · see citing works
Discussion Sections in Reports of Controlled Trials Published in General Medical Journals
Clarke, M. J., & Chalmers, I. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.280.3.280 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Horton, R. (1995) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.310.6985.985 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
Self-citationDiscussion Sections in Reports of Controlled Trials Published in General Medical Journals
Clarke, M. J. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2799 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Poliomyelitis outbreak in Israel in 1988: a report with two commentaries.
Slater, P. E., Costin, C., Yarrow, A., Ben-Zvi, T., Avni, A., Epstein, I., Orenstein, W. A., Morag, A., Handsher, R., Green, M. S., et al. (1990) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(90)92705-m · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Changes to Manuscripts During the Editorial Process
Purcell, G. P., Donovan, S. L., & Davidoff, F. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.280.3.227 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Rennie, D. (1991) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1991.03470230091037 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Dissent: an alternative interpretation of MAST-I
Tognoni, G., & Roncaglioni, M. C. (1995) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(95)92050-1 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
The unstable medical research paper
Horton, R. (1997) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(97)00156-x · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Self-citationInformation and Knowledge Extraction from Medical Texts
Kontos, J., & Malagardi, I. (2000) · Studies in health technology and informatics · doi:10.3233/978-1-60750-901-1-260 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., Egger, M., & Initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297 · Cited by 8,613 · see citing works
“Surveys have found that discussion sections are often dominated by incomplete or biased assessments of the study's results and their implications, and rhetoric supporting the authors' fi ndings [192,193].”
Moons, K. G. M., Altman, D. G., Reitsma, J. B., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Macaskill, P., Steyerberg, E. W., Vickers, A. J., Ransohoff, D. F., & Collins, G. S. (2015) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m14-0698 · Cited by 5,147 · see citing works
Vandenbroucke, J. P., Elm, E. V., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., Egger, M., & initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010-w1 · Cited by 3,543 · see citing works
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., & Egger, M. (2014) · International Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.07.014 · Cited by 2,969 · see citing works
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., & Egger, M. (2007) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e3181577511 · Cited by 2,779 · see citing works
Boutron, I. (2010) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2010.651 · Cited by 842 · see citing works
Yavchitz, A., Boutron, I., Bafeta, A., Marroun, I., Charles, P., Mantz, J., & Ravaud, P. (2012) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001308 · Cited by 293 · see citing works
The Contract Research Organization and the Commercialization of Scientific Research
Mirowski, P., & van Horn, R. V. (2005) · Social Studies of Science · doi:10.1177/0306312705052103 · Cited by 223 · see citing works
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E. B., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., & Egger, M. (2009) · Gaceta Sanitaria · doi:10.1016/j.gaceta.2008.12.001 · Cited by 203 · see citing works
Limitations are not properly acknowledged in the scientific literature
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.09.011 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Manchikanti, L. (2009) · Pain Physician · doi:10.36076/ppj.2009/12/73 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Fourth International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication
Rennie, D. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2759 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Alexandrov, A. V. (2004) · Cerebrovascular Diseases · doi:10.1159/000079266 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
You, B., Gan, H. K., Pond, G. R., & Chen, E. X. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2011.37.0890 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Randomized controlled trials of continuing medical education: What makes them most effective?
Cauffman, J. G., Forsyth, R. A., Clark, V. A., Foster, J. P., Martin, K. J., Lapsys, F. X., & Davis, D. A. (2002) · Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions · doi:10.1002/chp.1340220405 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Anti-TNFα therapy in immune-mediated subfertility: State of the art
Clark, D. A. (2010) · Journal of Reproductive Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jri.2010.01.007 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Horner, J., & Minifie, F. (2011) · Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0263 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
The reproducibility of biomedical research: Sleepers awake!
Bustin, S. A. (2014) · Biomolecular Detection and Quantification · doi:10.1016/j.bdq.2015.01.002 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Poverty, Environment, and Health
O’Neill, M. S., McMichael, A. J., Schwartz, J. D., & Wartenberg, D. E. (2007) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e3181570ab9 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Gerrits, R. G., Jansen, T., Mulyanto, J., van den Berg, M. J., Klazinga, N., & Kringos, D. S. (2019) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027903 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies (GRIPS): explanation and elaboration
Janssens, A. C. J. W., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Bedrosian, S. R., Boffetta, P., Dolan, S. M., Dowling, N. F., Fortier, I., Freedman, A. N., Grimshaw, J., Gulcher, J. R., et al. (2011) · European Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2362.2011.02493.x · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Young, S. N. (2009) · Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · doi:10.1139/jpn.0952 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
What We Still Don't Know About Peer Review
Sabaj, O., Vergara, C. G., & Piña-Stranger, Á. (2016) · Journal of Scholarly Publishing · doi:10.3138/jsp.47.2.180 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Dean, C. E., Akhtar, S., Gale, T. M., Irvine, K., Grohmann, D., & Laws, K. R. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0267360 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
All That Glitters Isn't Gold: A Survey on Acknowledgment of Limitations in Biomedical Studies
ter Riet, G., Chesley, P., Gross, A. G., Siebeling, L., Muggensturm, P. M., Heller, N., Umbehr, M., Vollenweider, D. J., Yu, T., Akl, E. A., et al. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0073623 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies (GRIPS): explanation and elaboration
Janssens, A. C. J. W., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Bedrosian, S. R., Boffetta, P., Dolan, S. M., Dowling, N. F., Fortier, I., Freedman, A. N., Grimshaw, J., Gulcher, J. R., et al. (2011) · European Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1038/ejhg.2011.27 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Jenicek, M. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Nascimento, D. P., Costa, L. O. P., Gonzalez, G. Z., Maher, C. G., & Moseley, A. M. (2019) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2019.03.024 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
A Clinician's Guide to Statistics and Epidemiology in Mental Health: Measuring Truth and Uncertainty
Ghaemi, S. N. (2009) · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Leadership and management in education: What's in a field?
Ribbins, P. (2007) · South African Journal of Education · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Selective discussion and transparency in microarray research findings for cancer outcomes
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Polyzos, N. P., & Trikalinos, T. A. (2007) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2007.05.019 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E. B., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., & Egger, M. (2022) · Вопросы современной педиатрии · doi:10.15690/vsp.v21i3.2426 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies (GRIPS): explanation and elaboration
Janssens, A. C. J. W., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Bedrosian, S. R., Boffetta, P., Dolan, S. M., Dowling, N. F., Fortier, I., Freedman, A. N., Grimshaw, J., Gulcher, J. R., et al. (2011) · European Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1007/s10654-011-9551-z · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E. B., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., & Egger, M. (2021) · Digital Diagnostics · doi:10.17816/dd70821 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Liesegang, T. J., Albert, D. M., SCHACHAT, A. P., & Minckler, D. S. (2003) · American Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/s0002-9394(02)02272-9 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Peer review in open access scientific journals.
Falagas, M. E. (2007) · PubMed Central · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E. B., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., & Egger, M. (2024) · Ewha Medical Journal · doi:10.12771/emj.2024.e31 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Mapping the expanded often inappropriate use of the Framingham Risk Score in the medical literature
Tzoulaki, I., Seretis, A., Ntzani, E., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.10.021 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Multiple publications from a single study: Ethical dilemmas
Hicks, R., & Berg, J. A. (2014) · Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners · doi:10.1002/2327-6924.12125 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Criticism of peer review and ways to improve it
Ahmed, H., & Gasparyan, A. Y. (2013) · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Keserlioglu, K., Halil Kilicoglu, B., & ter Riet, G. (2019) · Research Integrity and Peer Review · doi:10.1186/s41073-019-0078-2 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
John, S. D. (2018) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-018-02017-4 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Landmark, landmine, or landfill? The role of peer review in assessing manuscripts.
Balistreri, W. (2007) · Jornal de Pediatria · doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2007.05.049 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Strengthening the reporting of Genetic RIsk Prediction Studies (GRIPS): explanation and elaboration
Janssens, A. C. J. W., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Bedrosian, S. R., Boffetta, P., Dolan, S. M., Dowling, N. F., Fortier, I., Freedman, A. N., Grimshaw, J., Gulcher, J. R., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.02.003 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Hermes‐Lima, M., Polcheira, C., Trigueiro, M. G. S., & Beleboni, R. O. (2008) · Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A Molecular & Integrative Physiology · doi:10.1016/j.cbpa.2008.08.004 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Redundant Publication of Clinical Trials on Herpetic Keratitis
Wilhelmus, K. R. (2007) · American Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2007.04.047 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Moons, K. G. M., Altman, D. G., Reitsma, J. B., loannidis, J. P. A., Macaskill, P., Steyerberg, E. W., Vickers, A. J., Ransohoff, D. F., & Collins, P. G. S. (2022) · Digital Diagnostics · doi:10.17816/dd110794 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Interpreting the results of a clinical trial
KEECH, A. C., Pike, R., Granger, R. E., & Gebski, V. (2007) · The Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb00911.x · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Revealing the faults in medical journals
Liesegang, T. J. (2009) · Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis · doi:10.1007/s00005-009-0012-2 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Writing in/of/and educational leadership: reflections of a journal editor
Waite, D. (2017) · Journal of Educational Administration & History · doi:10.1080/00220620.2017.1343290 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Stöckli, S., Koufatzidou, M., Seehra, J., & Pandis, N. (2023) · Journal of Dentistry · doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104603 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Eighth international congress on peer review in biomedical publication
Rennie, D., Flanagin, A., Godlee, F., & Bloom, T. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.h2411 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Bliss, D. Z. (2002) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-200211000-00001 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Moons, E. G. M., Altman, D. G., Reitsma, J. B., Macaskill, P., Steyerberg, E. W., Vickers, A. J., Ransohoff, D. F., & Collins, P. G. S. (2015) · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Published articles should not be dead and buried: introducing research updates
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Tatsioni, A., & Karassa, F. B. (2010) · European Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2362.2010.02350.x · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Peirce and Royce and the Betrayal of Science: Scientific Fraud and Misconduct
Kegley, J. A. K. (2010) · The Pluralist · doi:10.1353/plu.2010.0003 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Scientific papers: Which type would you prefer?
Hu, C. (2019) · Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.joim.2019.02.003 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Defining Authorship for Group Studies
Liesegang, T. J., SCHACHAT, A. P., & Albert, D. M. (2010) · American Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2010.06.001 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Boespflug, A. M., Gan, H. K., Chen, É. X., Pond, G. R., & You, B. (2012) · Bulletin du Cancer · doi:10.1684/bdc.2012.1651 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Peer Review ‐ What is it? Why use it?
REVINGTON, M. (2002) · Australian Veterinary Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1751-0813.2002.tb10960.x · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Defining Authorship for Group Studies
Liesegang, T. J., SCHACHAT, A. P., & Albert, D. M. (2010) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.06.009 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Strange face illusions: A systematic review and quality analysis
Mash, J., Jenkinson, P. M., Dean, C. E., & Laws, K. R. (2023) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2023.103480 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Yaseen, N. Y. (2018) · Iraqi Journal of Cancer and Medical Genetics · doi:10.29409/ijcmg.v5i2.83 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Toward a Practical Theology of Peer Review
Sanders, R. W., Wise, K. P., Francis, J. W., & Wood, T. C. (2008) · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Our editorial process - some experiences and reflections
Emmelin, M., & Wall, S. (2003) · Scandinavian Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1080/14034940310005790 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Moons, K. G. M., Altman, D. G., Reitsma, J. B., loannidis, J. P. A., Macaskill, P., Steyerberg, E. W., Vickers, A. J., Ransohoff, D. F., & Collins, P. G. S. (2023) · Вопросы современной педиатрии · doi:10.15690/vsp.v22i2.2557 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Reddy, S. S. P., Francis, D. L., Harish, R., Raja, K., Krishnan, S. A., Chopra, S. S., Manohar, B., Narayana, R., & Kesavalu, L. N. (2024) · Medical Journal Armed Forces India · doi:10.1016/j.mjafi.2024.04.010 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Koufatzidou, M., Karveleas, I., Seehra, J., & Pandis, N. (2022) · American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics · doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2022.08.016 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Interpretation of Research Results: An Indispensable Mission Impossible?
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2008) · Seminars in Hematology · doi:10.1053/j.seminhematol.2008.04.009
Nolan, T., & Bustin, S. A. (2013) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/b14930-20
How to Write a Report of a Research Study
Taylor, R. B. (2017) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-70126-4_11
11 How to Write a Report of a Clinical Study
Taylor, R. B. (2011) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-8234-6_11
Peirce and Royce and the Betrayal of Science: Scientific Fraud and Misconduct
Kegley, J. A. K. (2010) · The Pluralist · doi:10.5406/pluralist.5.2.0087
How to Write a Report of a Clinical Study
(2006) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/0-387-27024-8_9
Stejskal, D., & Lašák, B. (2006) · Cor et Vasa · doi:10.33678/cor.2006.013
- Authors
- Horton, R.
- Corresponding author
- Horton, Richard
- ORCID
- Horton, Richard
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2002-06-05
- Volume
- 287
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 2775
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2095959788
- Cited by
- 75
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 17.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- JAMA (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- self-censorship, discussion section, research implications, Lancet
- MeSH terms
- Manuscripts, Medical as Topic, Publishing, Writing, Peer Review, Research, Editorial Policies, Biomedical Research
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
