Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 467

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

EGAPP supplementary evidence review: DNA testing strategies aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome

Open access
Palomaki, Glenn E., McClain, Monica R., Melillo, Stephanie, Hampel, Heather L., Thibodeau, Stephen N.·2009·Genetics in Medicine

Abstract

An original evidence review examined screening and diagnosis of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) and the subsequent outcomes in a population of newly diagnosed cases of colorectal cancer (CRC). This supplementary evidence review focuses on five issues of further interest to the Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Working Group (EWG), as summarized below.

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 · 10.1097/gim.0b013e31818fa2db

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 467

Metadata

Authors
Palomaki, G. E., McClain, M. R., Melillo, S., Hampel, H. L., & Thibodeau, S. N.
Venue
Genetics in Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-01
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
42-65
ISSN
1098-3600 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2165736459
Cited by
467
References
0
FWCI
15.98
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: EGAPP supplementary evidence review: DNA testing strategies aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/gim.0b013e31818fa2db
The paper
Palomaki, G. E., McClain, M. R., Melillo, S., Hampel, H. L., & Thibodeau, S. N. (2009). EGAPP supplementary evidence review: DNA testing strategies aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome. Genetics in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/gim.0b013e31818fa2db

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.