Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 466

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Limitations of Risk Factors as Prognostic Tools

Ware, James H.·2006·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Identification of new risk factors for specific diseases is an enduring theme in medical research. Advances in molecular biology, genetics, and computational biology are accelerating the pace of this work. The research seeks to increase our understanding of the causes of diseases, but there is also hope that the recognition of new risk factors will lead to improved methods for identifying persons who are in the early stages of, or at high risk for, the diseases of concern. Research has shown, however, that a risk factor must have a much stronger association with the disease outcome than we ordinarily see . . .

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 · 10.1056/nejmp068249

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 466

Metadata

Authors
Ware, J. H.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2006-12-21
Volume
355
Issue
25
Pages
2615-2617
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W1987424755
Cited by
466
References
0
FWCI
38.74
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: The Limitations of Risk Factors as Prognostic Tools. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmp068249
The paper
Ware, J. H. (2006). The Limitations of Risk Factors as Prognostic Tools. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmp068249

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.