The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Meta-analyses of molecular association studies: Methodologic lessons for genetic epidemiology
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
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology<SUBTITLE>A Proposal for Reporting</SUBTITLE>
Stroup, D. F. (2000) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.283.15.2008 · Cited by 20,623
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
Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533446 · Cited by 16,955
Performing the Exact Test of Hardy-Weinberg Proportion for Multiple Alleles
Guo, S. W., & Thompson, E. A. (1992) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532296 · Cited by 4,880
Systematic Reviews in Health Care : Meta-Analysis in Context
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., & Altman, D. G. (2000) · Cited by 2,312
The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis
Jüni, P. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.11.1054 · Cited by 1,981
QUANTITATIVE METHODS IN THE REVIEW OF EPIDEMIOLOGIC LITERATURE1
GREENLAND, S. (1987) · Epidemiologic Reviews · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.epirev.a036298 · Cited by 1,644 · cited 1×
“Some authors, however, have argued that the focus should be on trying to understand the sources of heterogeneity rather than providing a possibly meaningless summary measure [44,50–53].”
BackgroundSystematic Review: Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated
Thompson, S. G. (1994) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.309.6965.1351 · Cited by 1,017
Petitti, D. B. (1994) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 869
Cited by
Thakkinstian, A., McEvoy, M., Minelli, C., Gibson, P., Hancox, B., Duffy, D., Thompson, J., Hall, I., Kaufman, J., Leung, T.-F., et al. (2005) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwi184 · Cited by 356
Self-citationUCHL1 is a Parkinson's disease susceptibility gene
Maraganore, D. M., Lesnick, T. G., Elbaz, A., Chartier‐Harlin, M., Gasser, T., Krüger, R., Hattori, N., Mellick, G. D., Quattrone, A., Satoh, J., et al. (2004) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.20017 · Cited by 262
Obstacles and opportunities in meta-analysis of genetic association studies
Salanti, G., Sanderson, S., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2005) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.gim.0000151839.12032.1a · Cited by 196
Nakaoka, H., & Inoue, I. (2009) · Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1038/jhg.2009.95 · Cited by 111
Metadata
- Authors
- Attia, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2003-04
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 297-303
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1998358624
- Cited by
- 311
- References
- 57
- FWCI
- 5.86
- 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: Meta-analyses of molecular association studies: Methodologic lessons for genetic epidemiology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0895-4356(03)00011-8
- The paper
- Attia, J. (2003). Meta-analyses of molecular association studies: Methodologic lessons for genetic epidemiology. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0895-4356(03)00011-8
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.
