Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 980

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL of MEDICINE

Gelijns, Annetine C., Rosenberg, Nathan, Moskowitz, Alan J.·2009·Studies on Science and the Innovation Process

Abstract

AbstractThe following sections are included:Why Uncertainty EnduresThe Post-Innovation Innovation ProcessPolicy ImplicationsReferences

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 · 10.1142/9789814273596_0013

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 980

Metadata

Authors
Gelijns, A. C., Rosenberg, N., & Moskowitz, A. J.
Venue
Studies on Science and the Innovation Process
Published
2009-08
Pages
265-273
OpenAlex
W4240615046
Cited by
980
References
0
FWCI
109.11
Type
book chapter
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: The NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL of MEDICINE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1142/9789814273596_0013
The paper
Gelijns, A. C., Rosenberg, N., & Moskowitz, A. J. (2009). The NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL of MEDICINE. Studies on Science and the Innovation Process. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814273596_0013

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.