Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 521

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Tolerating Uncertainty — The Next Medical Revolution?

Simpkin, Arabella L., Schwartzstein, Richard M.·2016·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

When we become obsessed with finding the right answer, at the risk of oversimplifying the richly iterative and evolutionary nature of clinical reasoning, the result is the very antithesis of humanistic, individualized patient-centered care.

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/nejmp1606402

Cites

3 of 3 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

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

Cited by

See all 521

Metadata

Authors
Simpkin, A. L., & Schwartzstein, R. M.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2016-11-03
Volume
375
Issue
18
Pages
1713-1715
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2546534702
Cited by
521
References
3
FWCI
60.82
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: Tolerating Uncertainty — The Next Medical Revolution? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmp1606402
The paper
Simpkin, A. L., & Schwartzstein, R. M. (2016). Tolerating Uncertainty — The Next Medical Revolution? New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmp1606402

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.