The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Incidence of haematological malignancy by sub-type: a report from the Haematological Malignancy Research Network
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Ascertainment of cases and disease classification is an acknowledged problem for epidemiological research into haematological malignancies. METHODS: The Haematological Malignancy Research Network comprises an ongoing population-based patient cohort. All diagnoses (paediatric and adult) across two UK Cancer Networks (population 3.6 million, >2000 diagnoses annually, socio-demographically representative of the UK) are made by an integrated haematopathology laboratory. Diagnostics, prognostics, and treatment are recorded to clinical trial standards, and socio-demographic measures are routinely obtained. RESULTS: A total of 10,729 haematological malignancies (myeloid=2706, lymphoid=8023) were diagnosed over the 5 years, that is, from 2004 to 2009. Descriptive data (age, sex, and deprivation), sex-specific age-standardised (European population) rates, and estimated UK frequencies are presented for 24 sub-types. The age of patients ranged from 4 weeks to 99 years (median 70.6 years), and the male rate was more than double the female rate for several myeloid and lymphoid sub-types, this difference being evident in both children and adults. No relationship with deprivation was detected. CONCLUSION: Accurate population-based data on haematological malignancies can be collected to the standard required to deliver reproducible results that can be extrapolated to national populations. Our analyses emphasise the importance of gender and age as disease determinants, and suggest that aetiological investigations that focus on socio-economic factors are unlikely to be rewarding.
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
Jemal, A., Siegel, R., Xu, J., & Ward, E. (2010) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.20073 · Cited by 12,596
Turner, J. J., Morton, L. M., Linet, M. S., Clarke, C. A., Kadin, M. E., Vajdic, C. M., Monnereau, A., Maynadié, M., Chiu, B. C.-H., Marcos-Gragera, R., et al. (2010) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2010-06-289561 · Cited by 231 · cited 1×
“…more informative descriptive data, including, for example, the application of bridge-coding algorithms to historically coded data (Sant et al, 2010; Turner et al, 2010; Maynadié et al, 2011) and the reporting of specialist hospitalbased case-series frequencies (Yoon et al, 2010; Mozaheb et al,…”
Method
Cited by
Morton, L. M., Slager, S. L., Cerhan, J. R., Wang, S. S., Vajdic, C. M., Skibola, C. F., Bracci, P. M., de Sanjose, S., Smedby, K. E., Chiu, B. C. H., et al. (2014) · JNCI Monographs · doi:10.1093/jncimonographs/lgu013 · Cited by 334
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Smith, A., Howell, D., Patmore, R., Jack, A., & Roman, E.
- Venue
- British Journal of Cancer
- Published
- 2011-11
- Volume
- 105
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1684-1692
- ISSN
- 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-1827
- OpenAlex
- W2016969330
- Cited by
- 692
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 12.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Incidence of haematological malignancy by sub-type: a report from the Haematological Malignancy Research Network. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/bjc.2011.450
- The paper
- Smith, A., Howell, D., Patmore, R., Jack, A., & Roman, E. (2011). Incidence of haematological malignancy by sub-type: a report from the Haematological Malignancy Research Network. British Journal of Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.450
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.