ArticleSystematic reviews2012
Establishing a new journal for systematic review products.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparing the Outcomes of Scalpel and Diathermocoagulation Dissection in Abdominoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.Systematic reviews · 2021Guideline
- The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.PLoS medicine · 2021Guideline
- Ticks (Acari: Ixodoidea) associated with mammals in Colombia: a historical review, molecular species confirmation, and establishment of new relationships.Parasitology research · 2021Pooled it
- Use of Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Environmental Health Epidemiology: a Systematic Review and Comparison with Guidelines.Current environmental health reports · 2015Pooled it
- Efficacy of inositol supplementation in the prevention and treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis.World journal of diabetes · 2025Article
- Systems for rating bodies of evidence used in systematic reviews of air pollution exposure and reproductive and children's health: a methodological survey.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2024Review
- Computed Tomography versus Sleep Endoscopy (DISE) to Predict the Effectiveness of Mandibular Advancement Devices in Adult Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Protocol for Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Is the answer to reducing early childhood caries in your pocket?Evidence-based dentistry · 2023Article
- [The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviewsDeclaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2022Article
- Global Research on Coronaviruses: Metadata-Based Analysis for Public Health Policies.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- Is reusing text from a protocol in the completed systematic review acceptable?Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Article
- External validation of type 2 diabetes computer simulation models: definitions, approaches, implications and room for improvement-a protocol for a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2017Article
- Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study.PLoS medicine · 2016Article
- Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement.Systematic reviews · 2015Article
- Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Welcome to a new age in publishing systematic reviews. We hope the launch of Systematic Reviews will resonate with a broad spectrum of readers interested in using them in a variety of ways, such as providing comprehensive and up to date evidence for patient management, informing health policy, and developing rigorous practice guidelines. Systematic reviews are increasingly popular. Our journal is committed to publishing a wide variety of well conducted and transparently reported systematic reviews and associated research. We are open access and electronic and not confined by space and so offer scope for publishing reviews in detail and providing a modern and innovative approach to publishing. We look forward to participating in the voyage with all of our readers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.