Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 932

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Brain tumor epidemiology: Consensus from the Brain Tumor Epidemiology Consortium

Open access
Bondy, Melissa L., Scheurer, Michael E., Malmer, Beatrice, Barnholtz-Sloan, Jill S., Davis, Faith G., Il'yasova, Dora, Kruchko, Carol, McCarthy, Bridget J., Rajaraman, Preetha, Schwartzbaum, Judith A., Sadetzki, Siegal, Schlehofer, Brigitte, Tihan, Tarik, Wiemels, Joseph L., Wrensch, Margaret, Buffler, Patricia A., On behalf of the Brain Tumor Epidemiology Consortium·2008·Cancer
DOI 10.1002/cncr.23741
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Epidemiologists in the Brain Tumor Epidemiology Consortium (BTEC) have prioritized areas for further research. Although many risk factors have been examined over the past several decades, there are few consistent findings, possibly because of small sample sizes in individual studies and differences between studies in patients, tumor types, and methods of classification. Individual studies generally have lacked samples of sufficient size to examine interactions. A major priority based on available evidence and technologies includes expanding research in genetics and molecular epidemiology of brain tumors. BTEC has taken an active role in promoting understudied groups, such as pediatric brain tumors; the etiology of rare glioma subtypes, such as oligodendroglioma; and meningioma, which, although it is not uncommon, has only recently been registered systematically in the United States. There also is a pressing need for more researchers, especially junior investigators, to study brain tumor epidemiology. However, relatively poor funding for brain tumor research has made it difficult to encourage careers in this area. In this report, BTEC epidemiologists reviewed the group's consensus on the current state of scientific findings, and they present a consensus on research priorities to identify which important areas the science should move to address.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.23741

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Bondy, M. L., Scheurer, M. E., Malmer, B., Barnholtz-Sloan, J. S., Davis, F. G., Il'yasova, D., Kruchko, C., McCarthy, B. J., Rajaraman, P., Schwartzbaum, J. A., Sadetzki, S., Schlehofer, B., Tihan, T., Wiemels, J. L., Wrensch, M., Buffler, P. A., & On behalf of the Brain Tumor Epidemiology Consortium
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-10-01
Volume
113
Issue
S7
Pages
1953-1968
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
DOI
10.1002/cncr.23741
OpenAlex
W2034138274
Cited by
932
References
3
FWCI
14.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.