Research Synthesis Methods

Papers
(The H4-Index of Research Synthesis Methods is 24. The table below lists those papers that are above that threshold based on CrossRef citation counts [max. 250 papers]. The publications cover those that have been published in the past four years, i.e., from 2021-08-01 to 2025-08-01.)
ArticleCitations
Accuracy of conversion formula for effect sizes: A Monte Carlo simulation311
An investigation of the impact of using contrast- and arm-synthesis models for network meta-analysis270
Advice for improving the reproducibility of data extraction in meta‐analysis158
Facilitating open science practices for research syntheses: PreregRS guides preregistration123
Reported methodological quality of medical systematic reviews: Development of an assessment tool (ReMarQ) and meta-research study123
A mapping exercise using automated techniques to develop a search strategy to identify systematic review tools100
Towards the automatic risk of bias assessment on randomized controlled trials: A comparison of RobotReviewer and humans86
Meta‐analyses of partial correlations are biased: Detection and solutions69
Assessment of key characteristics, methodology, and effect size measures used in meta‐analysis of human‐health‐related animal studies64
The age of abundant scholarly information and its synthesis– A time when ‘just google it’ is no longer enough62
What are the best methods for rapid reviews of the research evidence? A systematic review of reviews and primary studies57
Including non‐English language articles in systematic reviews: A reflection on processes for identifying low‐cost sources of translation support52
45
42
CausalMetaR: An R package for performing causally interpretable meta-analyses36
Fast‐and‐frugal decision tree for the rapid critical appraisal of systematic reviews35
Bias propagation in network meta‐analysis models32
Retrieving Cochrane reviews is sometimes challenging and their reporting is not always optimal30
Authors’ reply: Continuity corrections with Mantel–Haenszel estimators in Cochrane reviews30
Exploring graphical approaches to assess the impact of an additional trial on a decision model via updated meta-analysis28
Correct standard errors can bias meta‐analysis27
Network meta analysis to predict the efficacy of an approved treatment in a new indication26
A comprehensive systematic review dataset is a rich resource for training and evaluation of AI systems for title and abstract screening25
Reporting of Cochrane systematic review protocols with network meta‐analyses—A scoping review25
Synthesis of depression outcomes reported on different scales: A comparison of methods for modelling mean differences24
0.049000978469849