Cited by 71Academic Writing and Publishingscientometrics and bibliometrics researchPublishing and Scholarly Communication

Accuracy of references in five leading medical journals

Open access
Siebers, Robert, Holt, Shaun·2000·The Lancet

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 · 10.1016/s0140-6736(05)74090-3

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • It is well established that reference inaccuracies are highly prevalent in the peer-reviewed literature, ranging from 4% to 48% of citations.

    “It is well established that reference inaccuracies are highly prevalent in the peer-reviewed literature, ranging from 4% to 48% of citations [8-11].”

    From High Rates of Fabricated and Inaccurate References in ChatGPT-Generated Medical Content (2023) · cites this paper as [11]

    In “Accuracy of references in five leading medical journals” (page not provided), the authors report reference error rates from 4.1% to 40.3% across five journals and describe errors as prevalent in specialist biomedical journals. This supports the prevalence claim and the approximate 4% lower bound, but this source does not report a 48% upper bound. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 6 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Siebers, R., & Holt, S.
Affiliations
Victoria University of Wellington (NZ)
Corresponding author
Siebers, Robert
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-10
Volume
356
Issue
9239
Pages
1445
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W2067689661
Cited by
71
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
35.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet (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 › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Publishing and Scholarly Communication
Keywords
citation errors, citation accuracy, medical journal articles, bibliographic references
MeSH terms
Periodicals as Topic, Quality Control

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