Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29578574›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical investigation2018

Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews?

Trisha Greenhalgh, Sally Thorne, Kirsti Malterud

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical investigation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 394 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
394citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

394 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. What helps or hinders the communication of poor prognosis between secondary and primary care? A systematic review with narrative synthesis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Leadership and Employees' Mental Health Under Disruption: A Scoping Review and Critical Interpretive Synthesis.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2026
    Review
  20. Review

334 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Trisha GreenhalghDepartment of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2369-8088
Sally ThorneSchool of Nursing, University of British Colombia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1156-9425
Kirsti MalterudResearch Unit for General Practice, Uni Research Health, Bergen, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9556-616X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineNarrationSystematic Reviews as TopicHumansReview Literature as Topic

Identifiers

PMID29578574
PMCPMC6001568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.