The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A study of malignant tumours in Nigeria by short-term tissue culture
Open accessAbstract
Objective The main objectives of this study were to synthesise and compare pandemic preparedness strategies issued by the federal and provincial/territorial (P/T) governments in Canada and to assess whether COVID-19 public health (PH) measures were tailored towards priority populations, as defined by relevant social determinants of health. Methods This scoping review searched federal and P/T websites on daily COVID-19 pandemic preparedness strategies between 30 January and 30 April 2020. The PROGRESS-Plus equity-lens framework was used to define priority populations. All definitions, policies and guidelines of PH strategies implemented by the federal and P/T governments to reduce risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission were included. PH measures were classified using a modified Public Health Agency of Canada Framework for Canadian Pandemic Influenza Preparedness. Results A total of 722 COVID-19 PH measures were issued during the study period. Of these, home quarantine (voluntary) (n=13.0%; 94/722) and retail/commerce restrictions (10.9%; n=79/722) were the most common measures introduced. Many of the PH orders, including physical distancing, cancellation of mass gatherings, school closures or retail/commerce restrictions began to be introduced after 11 March 2020. Lifting of some of the PH orders in phases to reopen the economy began in April 2020 (6.5%; n=47/722). The majority (68%, n=491/722) of COVID-19 PH announcements were deemed mandatory, while 32% (n=231/722) were recommendations. Several PH measures (28.0%, n=202/722) targeted a variety of groups at risk of socially produced health inequalities, such as age, religion, occupation and migration status. Conclusions Most PH measures centred on limiting contact between people who were not from the same household. PH measures were evolutionary in nature, reflecting new evidence that emerged throughout the pandemic. Although ~30% of all implemented COVID-19 PH measures were tailored towards priority groups, there were still unintended consequences on these populations.
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
Cited by
Hinuma, Y., Nagata, K., Hanaoka, M., Nakai, M., Matsumoto, T., Kinoshita, K. I., Shirakawa, S., & Miyoshi, I. (1981) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.78.10.6476 · Cited by 2,252
Epstein-Barr virus receptor of human B lymphocytes is the C3d receptor CR2.
Fingeroth, J. D., Weis, J. J., Tedder, T. F., Strominger, J. L., Biro, P. A., & Fearon, D. T. (1984) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.81.14.4510 · Cited by 939
Iida, K., Mornaghi, R., & Nussenzweig, V (1982) · The Journal of experimental medicine · doi:10.1084/jem.155.5.1427 · Cited by 339
p53 is frequently mutated in Burkitt's lymphoma cell lines
Farrell, P. J., Allan, G. J., Shanahan, F., Vousden, K. H., & Crook, T. (1991) · The EMBO Journal · doi:10.1002/j.1460-2075.1991.tb07837.x · Cited by 254
Sequence analysis of Raji Epstein-Barr virus DNA
Hatfull, G., Bankier, A. T., Barrell, B. G., & Farrell, P. J. (1988) · Virology · doi:10.1016/0042-6822(88)90546-6 · Cited by 111
Metadata
- Authors
- Pulvertaft, R. J. V.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Pathology
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1965-05
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 261-273
- ISSN
- 0021-9746 (ISSN-L)
- 1472-4146
- OpenAlex
- W2128663983
- Cited by
- 578
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 16.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: A study of malignant tumours in Nigeria by short-term tissue culture. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jcp.18.3.261
- The paper
- Pulvertaft, R. J. V. (1965). A study of malignant tumours in Nigeria by short-term tissue culture. Journal of Clinical Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.18.3.261
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.