Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 187

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Subjectivity in evaluating oral epithelial dysplasia, carcinoma in situ and initial carcinoma

Pindborg, J. J., Reibel, J., Holmstrup, P.·1985·Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine

Abstract

During the 2nd Meeting of the International Association of Oral Pathologists in Amsterdam (1984). an exercise was held to study subjectivity in evaluating oral epithelial dysplasia. A poster with 9 color photomicrographs was presented to be evaluated anonymously by the participants. A total of 72 submitted diagnostic suggestions In Table I these suggestions are given together with the diagnosis by the authors. A surprisingly wide spectrum of diagnostic suggestions was found indicating the need for an internationally accepted set of criteria for oral epithelial dysplasia.

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 · 10.1111/j.1600-0714.1985.tb00549.x

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 187

Metadata

Authors
Pindborg, J. J., Reibel, J., & Holmstrup, P.
Venue
Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1985-10
Volume
14
Issue
9
Pages
698-708
ISSN
  • 0300-9777 (ISSN-L)
  • 0904-2512
  • 1600-0714
OpenAlex
W2071813608
Cited by
187
References
0
FWCI
4.20
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: Subjectivity in evaluating oral epithelial dysplasia, carcinoma in situ and initial carcinoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1600-0714.1985.tb00549.x
The paper
Pindborg, J. J., Reibel, J., & Holmstrup, P. (1985). Subjectivity in evaluating oral epithelial dysplasia, carcinoma in situ and initial carcinoma. Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0714.1985.tb00549.x

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.