Research Synthesis Methods

Papers
(The H4-Index of Research Synthesis Methods is 27. 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 2022-05-01 to 2026-05-01.)
ArticleCitations
Reported methodological quality of medical systematic reviews: Development of an assessment tool (ReMarQ) and meta-research study418
Advice for improving the reproducibility of data extraction in meta‐analysis185
Lord’s Paradox and two network meta-analysis models152
How to conduct an individual participant data meta-analysis in response to an emerging pathogen: Lessons learned from Zika and COVID-19138
Meta‐analyses of partial correlations are biased: Detection and solutions121
Assessment of key characteristics, methodology, and effect size measures used in meta‐analysis of human‐health‐related animal studies103
What are the best methods for rapid reviews of the research evidence? A systematic review of reviews and primary studies93
Transforming evidence synthesis: A systematic review of the evolution of automated meta-analysis in the age of AI81
An investigation of the impact of using contrast- and arm-synthesis models for network meta-analysis72
A mapping exercise using automated techniques to develop a search strategy to identify systematic review tools70
Bayesian workflow for bias-adjustment model in meta-analysis58
Meta-analytic-predictive priors based on a single study58
Towards the automatic risk of bias assessment on randomized controlled trials: A comparison of RobotReviewer and humans52
52
Synthesis of depression outcomes reported on different scales: A comparison of methods for modelling mean differences44
Authors’ reply: Continuity corrections with Mantel–Haenszel estimators in Cochrane reviews43
Network meta analysis to predict the efficacy of an approved treatment in a new indication39
Exploring graphical approaches to assess the impact of an additional trial on a decision model via updated meta-analysis38
Exploring the methodological quality and risk of bias in 200 systematic reviews: A comparative study of ROBIS and AMSTAR-2 tools37
Capturing causal claims: A fine-tuned text mining model for extracting causal sentences from social science papers34
Retrieving Cochrane reviews is sometimes challenging and their reporting is not always optimal32
Fast‐and‐frugal decision tree for the rapid critical appraisal of systematic reviews32
CausalMetaR: An R package for performing causally interpretable meta-analyses32
A comprehensive systematic review dataset is a rich resource for training and evaluation of AI systems for title and abstract screening31
Evaluation of semi-automated record screening methods for systematic reviews of prognosis studies and intervention studies30
Evaluation of the replicability of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of the effects of health interventions29
Incorporating the possibility of cure into network meta-analyses: A case study from resected Stage III/IV melanoma28
Bias propagation in network meta‐analysis models27
Estimands and their implications for evidence synthesis for oncology: A simulation study of treatment switching in meta-analysis27
0.27783393859863