Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 215

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Risk factors for congenital anomaly in a multiethnic birth cohort: an analysis of the Born in Bradford study

Sheridan, Eamonn, Wright, John, Small, Neil, Corry, Peter C, Oddie, Sam, Whibley, Catherine, Petherick, Emily S, Malik, Teena, Pawson, Nicole, McKinney, Patricia A, Parslow, Roger C·2013·The Lancet
DOI 10.1016/s0140-6736(13)61132-0
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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 · 10.1016/s0140-6736(13)61132-0

Cites

2 of 2 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

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?

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 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. Bundey, 1993, A five-year prospective study of the health of children in different ethnic groups, with particular reference to the effect of inbreeding, Eur J Hum Genet, 1, 206, 10.1159/000472414 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Ahmad, 1994, Reflections on the consanguinity and birth outcome debate, J Public Health Med, 16, 423, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubmed.a043023 · DOI
  3. Qureshi, 2011, Risks to offspring of consanguineous marriage: we need straight, not crooked thinking, J R Coll Physicians Edinb, 41, 194, 10.4997/JRCPE.2011.301 · DOI
  4. Saggar, 2008, Consanguinity and child health, Paediatr Child Health, 18, 244, 10.1016/j.paed.2008.02.008 · DOI
  5. Corry, 2002, Intellectual disability and cerebral palsy in a UK community, Community Genet, 5, 201, 10.1159/000066337 · DOI
  6. Devereux, 2004, Variations in neurodegenerative disease across the UK: findings from the national study of Progressive Intellectual and Neurological Deterioration (PIND), Arch Dis Child, 89, 8
  7. Schwarz, 2002, Survey of school children with visual impairment in Bradford, Eye, 16, 530, 10.1038/sj.eye.6700059 · DOI
  8. Wright, 2012, Cohort profile: the Born in Bradford multi-ethnic family cohort study, Int J Epidemiol
  9. Zou, 2004, A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data, Am J Epidemiol, 159, 702, 10.1093/aje/kwh090 · DOI
  10. Stoltenberg, 1997, Birth defects and parental consanguinity in Norway, Am J Epidemiol, 145, 439, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009126 · DOI
  11. Bromiker, 2004, Association of parental consanguinity with congenital malformations among Arab newborns in Jerusalem, Clin Genet, 66, 63, 10.1111/j.0009-9163.2004.00264.x · DOI
  12. Harlap, 2008, Consanguinity and birth defects in the Jerusalem perinatal study cohort, Hum Hered, 66, 180, 10.1159/000133837 · DOI
  13. Zlotogora, 2010, The consequences of consanguinity on the rates of malformations and major medical conditions at birth and in early childhood in inbred populations, Am J Med Genet A, 152A, 2023, 10.1002/ajmg.a.33537 · DOI
  14. Hollowell, 2011, Social and ethnic inequalities in infant mortality: a perspective from the United Kingdom, Semin Perinatol, 35, 240, 10.1053/j.semperi.2011.02.021 · DOI
  15. Overall, 2009, The influence of the wahlund effect on the consanguinity hypothesis: consequences for recessive disease incidence in a socially structured Pakistani population, Hum Hered, 67, 140, 10.1159/000179561 · DOI
  16. Hackshaw, 2011, Maternal smoking in pregnancy and birth defects: a systematic review based on 173 687 malformed cases and 11.7 million controls, Hum Reprod Update, 17, 589, 10.1093/humupd/dmr022 · DOI
  17. Martínez-Frías, 2004, Risk for congenital anomalies associated with different sporadic and daily doses of alcohol consumption during pregnancy: a case-control study, Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol, 70, 194, 10.1002/bdra.20017 · DOI
  18. Stothard, 2009, Maternal overweight and obesity and the risk of congenital anomalies: a systematic review and meta-analysis, JAMA, 301, 636, 10.1001/jama.2009.113 · DOI
  19. Macintosh, 2006, Perinatal mortality and congenital anomalies in babies of women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland: population based study, BMJ, 333, 177, 10.1136/bmj.38856.692986.AE · DOI · Paper page
  20. Corrigan, 2009, Fetal cardiac effects of maternal hyperglycemia during pregnancy, Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol, 85, 523, 10.1002/bdra.20567 · DOI
  21. Bennett, 2002, Genetic Counseling and Screening of Consanguineous Couples and Their Offspring: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors, J Genet Couns, 11, 97, 10.1023/A:1014593404915 · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Sheridan, E., Wright, J., Small, N., Corry, P. C., Oddie, S., Whibley, C., Petherick, E. S., Malik, T., Pawson, N., McKinney, P. A., & Parslow, R. C.
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-10
Volume
382
Issue
9901
Pages
1350-1359
ISSN
0140-6736
DOI
10.1016/s0140-6736(13)61132-0
Cited by
215
References
2
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Funders
National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) programme (KRD/012/001/006)

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.