Cited by 29History of Science and MedicineHistory of Medicine StudiesTraditional Chinese Medicine Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Medical Line of Many Masters: A Prosopographical Study of Liu Wansu and His Disciples from the Jin to the Early Ming

Yiyi, Wu·1993·East Asian Science, Technology, and Medicine

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1163/26669323-01101004

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Yiyi, W.
Corresponding author
Yiyi, Wu
Venue
East Asian Science, Technology, and Medicine
Published
1993-08-13
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
36-65
ISSN
  • 1562-918X (ISSN-L)
  • 2666-9323
OpenAlex
W2238657389
Cited by
29
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • East Asian Science Technology and Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › History of Science and Medicine
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › History of Medicine Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Traditional Chinese Medicine Studies
Keywords
disciples, prosopography, history of Chinese medicine, transmission of medical knowledge
MeSH terms
China, Humans, Medicine, Mentors, History, Ancient, History, Medieval, History, Modern 1601-

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