Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 357

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ethical aspects of registry-based research in the Nordic countries

Open access
Ludvigsson, Jonas, Nørgaard, Mette, Weiderpass, Elisabete, Håberg, Siri, LaFolie, Pierre, Sarkkola, Catharina, von Kraemer, Stephanie, Zoega, Helga, Knudsen, Gun Peggy·2015·Clinical Epidemiology

Abstract

National health care registries in the Nordic countries share many attributes, but different legal and ethical frameworks represent a challenge to promoting effective joint research. Internationally, there is a lack of knowledge about how ethical matters are considered in Nordic registry-based research, and a lack of knowledge about how Nordic ethics committees operate and what is needed to obtain an approval. In this paper, we review ethical aspects of registry-based research, the legal framework, the role of ethics review boards in the Nordic countries, and the structure of the ethics application. We discuss the role of informed consent in registry-based research and how to safeguard the integrity of study participants, including vulnerable subjects and children. Our review also provides information on the different government agencies that contribute registry-based data, and a list of the major health registries in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. Both ethical values and conditions for registry-based research are similar in the Nordic countries. While Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden have chosen different legal frameworks, these differences can be resolved through mutual recognition of ethical applications and by harmonizing the different systems, likely leading to increased collaboration and enlarged studies.

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 · 10.2147/clep.s90589

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 51 references

Cited by

See all 357

Metadata

Authors
Ludvigsson, J., Nørgaard, M., Weiderpass, E., Håberg, S., LaFolie, P., Sarkkola, C., von Kraemer, S., Zoega, H., & Knudsen, G. P.
Venue
Clinical Epidemiology
Published
2015-11
Volume
7
Pages
491
ISSN
1179-1349 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2175341273
Cited by
357
References
51
FWCI
18.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Ethical aspects of registry-based research in the Nordic countries. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2147/clep.s90589
The paper
Ludvigsson, J., Nørgaard, M., Weiderpass, E., Håberg, S., LaFolie, P., Sarkkola, C., von Kraemer, S., Zoega, H., & Knudsen, G. P. (2015). Ethical aspects of registry-based research in the Nordic countries. Clinical Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.2147/clep.s90589

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.