The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Applying Quantitative Bias Analysis to Epidemiologic Data
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Sensitivity analysis in observational research: Introducing the E-value
VanderWeele, T. J., & Ding, P. (2017) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m16-2607 · Cited by 6,350
Time to treatment and mortality during mandated emergency care for sepsis.
Seymour, C. W., Gesten, F., Prescott, H. C., Friedrich, M. E., Iwashyna, T. J., Phillips, G. S., Lemeshow, S., Osborn, T., Terry, K. M., & Levy, M. M. (2017) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1703058 · Cited by 2,225
Principles of confounder selection
VanderWeele, T. J. (2019) · European Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1007/s10654-019-00494-6 · Cited by 1,535
Using the E-Value to Assess the Potential Effect of Unmeasured Confounding in Observational Studies
Haneuse, S., VanderWeele, T. J., & Arterburn, D. (2019) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2018.21554 · Cited by 988
Chapman, B. P., Roberts, B., & Duberstein, P. (2011) · Journal of Aging Research · doi:10.4061/2011/759170 · Cited by 283
Metadata
- Authors
- Fink, A. K., Fox, M. P., & Lash, T. L.
- Venue
- Statistics for Biology and Health
- Publisher
- Springer New York
- Published
- 2009
- ISSN
- 1431-8776 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2100589819
- Cited by
- 343
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.26
- Type
- book
- 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: Applying Quantitative Bias Analysis to Epidemiologic Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/b97920
- The paper
- Fink, A. K., Fox, M. P., & Lash, T. L. (2009). Applying Quantitative Bias Analysis to Epidemiologic Data. Statistics for Biology and Health. https://doi.org/10.1007/b97920
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.
