The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Study of anosognosia.
Open accessAbstract
Introduction Gynaecological cancers collectively account for almost 10% of cancer diagnoses made in Australian women. The extent of variation in gynaecological cancer survival rates and treatment outcomes across Australia is not well documented. The purpose of the clinical quality registry described in this paper is to systematically monitor and improve quality of care provided to these women, and facilitate clinical process improvements to ensure better patient outcomes and greater adherence to best practice care. The registry infrastructure has been developed in conjunction alongside the inaugural ovarian, tubal and peritoneal (OTP) module, allowing for concurrent piloting of the methodology and one module. Additional tumour modules will be developed in time to cover the other gynaecological tumour types. Method and analysis The National Gynae-Oncology Registry (NGOR) aims to capture clinical data on all newly diagnosed cancers of the uterus, ovary, fallopian tubes, peritoneum, cervix, vulva and vagina in Australia with a view to using these data to support improved clinical care and increased adherence to ‘best practice’. Data are sourced from existing clinical databases maintained by clinicians and/or hospital gynaecological cancer units. A pilot phase incorporating only OTP cancers has recently been conducted to assess the feasibility of the registry methodology and assess the support of a quality initiative of this nature among clinicians and other key stakeholders. Ethics and dissemination The NGOR has received National Mutual Acceptance (NMA) ethics approval from Monash Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC), NMA HREC Reference Number: HREC/17/MonH/198. We also have approval from Mercy Health HREC and University of Tasmania HREC. Data will be routinely reported back to participating sites illustrating their performance against measures of agreed best practice. It is through this feedback system that the registry will support changes to quality of care and improved patient outcomes.
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
Cites
GERSTMANN, J. (1942) · Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archneurpsyc.1942.02290120042003 · Cited by 282
Cited by
Hemispatial neglect: Subtypes, neuroanatomy, and disability
Buxbaum, L. J., Ferraro, M. K., Veramonti, T., Farne, A., Whyte, J., Ladavas, E., Frassinetti, F., & Coslett, H. B. (2004) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000113730.73031.f4 · Cited by 590
Bisiach, E., Vallar, G., Perani, D., Papagno, C., & Berti, A. (1986) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/0028-3932(86)90092-8 · Cited by 567
Somatoparaphrenia: a body delusion. A review of the neuropsychological literature
Vallar, G., & Ronchi, R. (2009) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/s00221-008-1562-y · Cited by 470
Having a body versus moving your body: Neural signatures of agency and body-ownership
Tsakiris, M., Longo, M. R., & Haggard, P. (2010) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.05.021 · Cited by 358
Anosognosia for plegia: specificity, extension, partiality and disunity of bodily unawareness
MARCEL, A., TEGNER, R., & NIMMOSMITH, I. (2004) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70919-5 · Cited by 277
Metadata
- Authors
- Cutting, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1978-06-01
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 548-555
- ISSN
- 0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2151434985
- Cited by
- 238
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 0.49
- 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: Study of anosognosia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jnnp.41.6.548
- The paper
- Cutting, J. (1978). Study of anosognosia. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.41.6.548
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.