ArticleBMC medical research methodology2020
Epistemonikos: a comprehensive database of systematic reviews for health decision-making.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 8 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Perioperative oxygen therapy: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Pooled it
- Perioperative oxygen therapy in patients undergoing surgical procedures: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Evidence-informed guidelines in oral health: insights from a systematic survey.BMC oral health · 2024Pooled it
- An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses Evaluating Associations between Human Health and Exposure to Major Classes of Plastic-Associated Chemicals.Annals of global health · 2024Pooled it
- Corticosteroids for managing acute pain subsequent to surgical extraction of mandibular third molars: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2023Pooled it
- The Role of Social Determinants of Health in Cardiovascular Diseases: An Umbrella Review.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Instruments to measure fear of COVID-19: a diagnostic systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Pooled it
- Review
- Integrating evidence synthesis into doctoral research: A guide for family medicine and primary care.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Using Social Media to Disseminate Behavior Change Interventions: Scoping Review of Systematic Reviews.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The optimal approach for retrieving systematic reviews was achieved when searching MEDLINE and Epistemonikos in addition to reference checking: a methodological validation study.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Article
- Development and validation of a search strategy and an automated classifier for retrieving temporomandibular disorders studies.Journal of oral & facial pain and headache · 2024Article
- The effects of public health and social measures (PHSM) implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic: An overview of systematic reviews.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2024Review
- Search strategies (filters) to identify systematic reviews in MEDLINE and Embase.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- Protocol for the development of guidance for collaborator and partner engagement in health care evidence syntheses.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- The effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy procedures for spine pain: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2023Article
- Living, Rapid Reviews in a Rapidly Evolving World.Annals of internal medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
35 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSystematic reviews allow health decisions to be informed by the best available research evidence. However, their number is proliferating quickly, and many skills are required to identify all the relevant reviews for a specific question. METHODS AND
findingsWe screen 10 bibliographic databases on a daily or weekly basis, to identify systematic reviews relevant for health decision-making. Using a machine-based approach developed for this project we select reviews, which are then validated by a network of more than 1000 collaborators. After screening over 1,400,000 records we have identified more than 300,000 systematic reviews, which are now stored in a single place and accessible through an easy-to-use search engine. This makes Epistemonikos the largest database of its kind.
conclusionsUsing a systematic approach, recruiting a broad network of collaborators and implementing automated methods, we developed a one-stop shop for systematic reviews relevant for health decision making.
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.