The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Non-invasive imaging compared with intra-arterial angiography in the diagnosis of symptomatic carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis
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
Cites
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (2003) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471445428 · Cited by 18,646
Benefit of Carotid Endarterectomy in Patients with Symptomatic Moderate or Severe Stenosis
Barnett, H. J. M., Taylor, D. W., Eliasziw, M., Fox, A. J., Ferguson, G. G., Haynes, R. B., Rankin, R. N., Clagett, G. P., Hachinski, V. C., Sackett, D. L., et al. (1998) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199811123392002 · Cited by 3,594
Whiting, P., Rutjes, A. W., Reitsma, J. B., Bossuyt, P. M., & Kleijnen, J. (2003) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-3-25 · Cited by 3,592
Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative.
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., de Vet, H. C. W., et al. (2003) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-138-1-200301070-00010 · Cited by 3,219
Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41 · Cited by 3,215
Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD Initiative
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2003) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2261021292 · Cited by 3,215
Publication bias in clinical research
Easterbrook, P. J., Gopalan, R., Berlin, J. A., & Matthews, D. R. (1991) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-y · Cited by 3,109
Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests.
Lijmer, J. G. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.11.1061 · Cited by 1,861
Rothwell, P., Eliasziw, M., Gutnikov, S., Fox, A., Taylor, D., Mayberg, M., Warlow, C., & Barnett, H. (2003) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(03)12228-3 · Cited by 1,696
Moses, L. E., Shapiro, D., & Littenberg, B. (1993) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780121403 · Cited by 1,405
Cited by
Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases
Song, F., Parekh, Hooper, L., Loke, Y., Ryder, J., Sutton, A., Hing, C., Kwok, C., Pang, C., & Harvey, I. (2010) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta14080 · Cited by 1,039
Empirical evidence of the importance of comparative studies of diagnostic test accuracy
Takwoingi, Y., Leeflang, M. M. G., & Deeks, J. J. (2013) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-158-7-201304020-00006 · Cited by 187
Metadata
- Authors
- Wardlaw, J., Chappell, F., Best, J., Wartolowska, K., & Berry, E.
- Venue
- The Lancet
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2006-05
- Volume
- 367
- Issue
- 9521
- Pages
- 1503-1512
- ISSN
- 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
- 0140-6736
- OpenAlex
- W2107307209
- Cited by
- 375
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 4.67
- 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: Non-invasive imaging compared with intra-arterial angiography in the diagnosis of symptomatic carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(06)68650-9
- The paper
- Wardlaw, J., Chappell, F., Best, J., Wartolowska, K., & Berry, E. (2006). Non-invasive imaging compared with intra-arterial angiography in the diagnosis of symptomatic carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(06)68650-9
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.
