ArticleUgeskrift for laeger2007
[School performance--no difference between twins and singletons--secondary publication].
Article in Ugeskrift for laeger, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Reprint of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies of twins born 50+ years ago indicate that twins had a lower IQ than singletons. We carried out a register based study of all twins (N=3411) and a 5% random sample of singletons (N=7796) born in Denmark 1986-1988. We found no difference in school performance in adolescence between twins and singletons, nor when controlling for birth weight, gestational weight, age of parents or parents' education. Progress within living conditions, obstetrics, and paediatrics may be the reason why twins now generally have school performances similarly to singletons.
Identifiers
17915100What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.