Clinical trial IDs need to be validated prior to publication because hundreds of invalid National Clinical Trial Identifications are regularly entering MEDLINE
Open accessThe 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
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.
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?
Typographic sequence errors seem likely to represent stochastic errors, possibly analogous to reported errors in published clinical trial identifiers.
“Similarly, typographic sequence errors seem likely to represent stochastic errors, possibly analogous to reported errors in published clinical trial identifiers [66].”
From Semi-automated fact-checking of nucleotide sequence reagents in biomedical research publications: The Seek & Blastn tool (2019) · cites this paper as [66]
Like other identifiers without inherent visual meaning, cell line identifiers are easily written incorrectly or misspelled.
“As reported for other identifiers that lack intrinsic visual sense (52), cell line identifiers are prone to being wrongly written or misspelled (22, 26).”
From Misspellings or “miscellings”—Non‐verifiable and unknown cell lines in cancer research publications (2024) · cites this paper as [52]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Cited by 4
- Authors
- Wren, J. D.
- Affiliations
- Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation (US)
- Corresponding author
- Wren, Jonathan D
- ORCID
- Wren, Jonathan D
- Venue
- Clinical Trials
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-09-22
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 109-109
- ISSN
- 1740-7745 (ISSN-L)
- 1740-7753
- OpenAlex
- W2519922191
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 0.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Clinical Trials (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Library Science and Information Systems
- Keywords
- MEDLINE, publication errors, bibliographic data quality
- MeSH terms
- Data Accuracy, Clinical Trials as Topic, MEDLINE
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
