Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41626914›Full record

ArticleResearch synthesis methods2025

Weighted corrected covered area (wCCA): A measure of informational overlap among reviews.

Xiangji Ying, Konstantinos I Bougioukas, Dawid Pieper, Evan Mayo-Wilson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research synthesis methods, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

4 authors.

Xiangji YingDepartment of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Konstantinos I BougioukasDepartment of Hygiene, Social-Preventive Medicine & Medical Statistics, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, University Campus, Thessaloniki, Central Macedonia, Greece.
Dawid PieperCenter for Health Services Research, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Rüdersdorf, Germany.
Evan Mayo-WilsonDepartment of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When conducting overviews of reviews, investigators must measure and describe the extent to which included systematic reviews (SRs) contain the same primary studies. The corrected covered area (CCA) quantifies overlap by counting primary studies included across a set of SRs. In this article, we introduce a modification to the CCA, the weighted CCA (wCCA), which accounts for differences in information contributed by primary studies. The wCCA adjusts the original CCA by weighting studies based on the square roots of their sample sizes. By weighting primary studies according to their precision, wCCA provides a useful and complementary representation of overlap in evidence syntheses .

Indexed as

Research DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicAlgorithmsHumansSample Sizecorrected covered areaoverlapoverviewweighted corrected covered area

Identifiers

PMID41626914
PMCPMC12527530

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.