Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 265

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Further validation of information recorded on a general practitioner based computerized data resource in the united kingdom

Jick, Hershel, Terris, Barbara Z., Derby, Laura E., Jick, Susan S.·1992·Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety

Abstract

Studies have been carried out to evaluate the quality and completeness of the data recorded by GPs on VAMP computers for the purpose of carrying out drug safety studies. In an earlier study of 58 practices we found that clinical diagnoses reflecting the diagnoses noted in the consultant letters were present on the computer 87% of the time. We have now evaluated a further 35 practices. Agreement between the information in the consultant letter and that on the computer was present in 121 of 126 (96%) instances.

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/pds.2630010607

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 265

Metadata

Authors
Jick, H., Terris, B. Z., Derby, L. E., & Jick, S. S.
Venue
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1992-11
Volume
1
Issue
6
Pages
347-349
ISSN
  • 1053-8569 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1557
OpenAlex
W1996239854
Cited by
265
References
1
FWCI
14.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Further validation of information recorded on a general practitioner based computerized data resource in the united kingdom. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/pds.2630010607
The paper
Jick, H., Terris, B. Z., Derby, L. E., & Jick, S. S. (1992). Further validation of information recorded on a general practitioner based computerized data resource in the united kingdom. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.2630010607

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.