The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Costs and benefits of a decision
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Adults are better in identifying risks than children and adolescents but not in identification of benefits.
“Adults are better in identifying risks than children and adolescents but not in identification of benefits [38].”
From Medical decision-making in children and adolescents: developmental and neuroscientific aspects (2017) · cites this paper as [38]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 129
Metadata
- Authors
- Halpern-Felsher, B. L., & Cauffman, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- ORCID
- Cauffman, Elizabeth
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2001-05
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 257-273
- ISSN
- 0193-3973 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W179308275
- Cited by
- 129
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 3.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- Health Resources and Services Administration
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
- Maternal and Child Health Bureau
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Adolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
- Keywords
- decision-making capacity, adolescents, young adults, age differences, advice seeking, informed consent, age of majority
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
