OOIR: Observatory of International Research

Papers

(The TQCC of Research Synthesis Methods is 7. 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 2021-04-01 to 2025-04-01.)

Article	Citations
Language inclusion in ecological systematic reviews and maps: Barriers and perspectives	246
Effect modification and non-collapsibility together may lead to conflicting treatment decisions: A review of marginal and conditional estimands and recommendations for decision-making	215
Comment on a review of methods to assess publication and other reporting biases in meta‐analysis	138
Impact of searching clinical trials registers in systematic reviews of pharmaceutical and non‐pharmaceutical interventions: Reanalysis of meta‐analyses	106
Adherence to conflicts of interest policy in Cochrane reviews where authors are also editorial board members: A cross‐sectional analysis	102
Evaluation of the interim Cochrane rapid review methods guidance—A mixed‐methods study on the understanding of and adherence to the guidance	75
Automated data analysis of unstructured grey literature in health research: A mapping review	58
Estimating the reference interval from a fixed effects meta‐analysis	53
Issue Information	50
A framework to characterise the reproducibility of meta‐analysis results with its application to direct oral anticoagulants in the acute treatment of venous thromboembolism	49
Accuracy and precision of fixed and random effects in meta‐analyses of randomized control trials for continuous outcomes	47
Issue Information	37
Combining meta‐analysis with multiple imputation for one‐step, privacy‐protecting estimation of causal treatment effects in multi‐site studies	34
Advice for improving the reproducibility of data extraction in meta‐analysis	31
Rare events meta‐analysis using the Bayesian beta‐binomial model	30
Meta‐analyses of partial correlations are biased: Detection and solutions	30
What are the best methods for rapid reviews of the research evidence? A systematic review of reviews and primary studies	30
‘Twenty years of network meta‐analysis: Continuing controversies and recent developments’: A health technology assessment perspective	27
Facilitating open science practices for research syntheses: PreregRS guides preregistration	27
The age of abundant scholarly information and its synthesis– A time when ‘just google it’ is no longer enough	26
A mapping exercise using automated techniques to develop a search strategy to identify systematic review tools	25
	22
Kenward‐Roger–type corrections for inference methods of network meta‐analysis and meta‐regression	21
Response to Kim et al. “When conducting a systematic review, can one trade search efficiency for potential publication bias?”	21
A search of only four key databases would identify most randomized controlled trials of acupuncture: A meta‐epidemiological study	21

Assessment of key characteristics, methodology, and effect size measures used in meta‐analysis of human‐health‐related animal studies	19
Additional considerations and response to ‘graphical representation of overlap for OVErviews (GROOVE tool)’	18
Combining estimators in interlaboratory studies and meta‐analyses	18
Towards the automatic risk of bias assessment on randomized controlled trials: A comparison of RobotReviewer and humans	17
Zero‐ and few‐shot prompting of generative large language models provides weak assessment of risk of bias in clinical trials	17
Development of the individual participant data integrity tool for assessing the integrity of randomised trials using individual participant data	17
Accuracy of conversion formula for effect sizes: A Monte Carlo simulation	16
How trace plots help interpret meta‐analysis results	16
Case study meta‐analysis in the social sciences. Insights on data quality and reliability from a large‐N case survey	15
Broad versus narrow research questions in evidence synthesis: A parallel to (and plea for) estimands	15
A framework for synthesizing intervention evidence from multiple sources into a single certainty of evidence rating: Methodological developments from a US National Academies of S	15
Meta‐analyzing partial correlation coefficients using Fisher's z transformation	15
Risk of bias assessment in preclinical literature using natural language processing	15
Comparing methods for handling missing covariates in meta‐regression	15
Including non‐English language articles in systematic reviews: A reflection on processes for identifying low‐cost sources of translation support	15
Reported methodological quality of medical systematic reviews: Development of an assessment tool (ReMarQ) and meta-research study	14
Two‐stage or not two‐stage? That is the question for IPD meta‐analysis projects	14
Using clinical trial registries to inform Copas selection model for publication bias in meta‐analysis	13
Automated citation searching in systematic review production: A simulation study	13
The impact of continuity correction methods in Cochrane reviews with single‐zero trials with rare events: A meta‐epidemiological study	13
	13
Reporting of Cochrane systematic review protocols with network meta‐analyses—A scoping review	13
Network meta‐analysis: Looping back	12
Combining endpoint and change data did not affect the summary standardised mean difference in pairwise and network meta‐analyses: An empirical study in depression	12
Issue Information	12
Bayesian pairwise meta‐analysis of time‐to‐event outcomes in the presence of non‐proportional hazards: A simulation study of flexible parametric, piecewise exponential and fractional polynomial models	12
Meta‐analysis and partial correlation coefficients: A matter of weights	11
Issue Information	11
	11
Correct standard errors can bias meta‐analysis	10
A comprehensive systematic review dataset is a rich resource for training and evaluation of AI systems for title and abstract screening	10
Rapid evidence synthesis approach for limits on the search date: How rapid could it be?	10
On the double‐robustness and semiparametric efficiency of matching‐adjusted indirect comparisons	10
Synthesis of depression outcomes reported on different scales: A comparison of methods for modelling mean differences	10
	10
A novel robust meta-analysis model using the t distribution for outlier accommodation and detection	10
	9
Graphical evaluation of evidence structure within a component network meta‐analysis	9
Searchsmart.org: Guiding researchers to the best databases and search systems for systematic reviews and beyond	9
Adjusting for misclassification of an exposure in an individual participant data meta‐analysis	9
Developing prediction models when there are systematically missing predictors in individual patient data meta‐analysis	9
Applying Bradford Hill to assessing causality in systematic reviews: A transparent approach using process tracing	8
	8
Exploring methodological approaches used in network meta‐analysis of psychological interventions: A scoping review	8
Fast‐and‐frugal decision tree for the rapid critical appraisal of systematic reviews	8
Meta‐analyses of phase I dose‐finding studies: Application for the development of protein kinase inhibitors in oncology	8
Conducting power analysis for meta‐analysis with dependent effect sizes: Common guidelines and an introduction to the POMADE R package	7
A REML method for the evidence‐splitting model in network meta‐analysis	7
Response to Hemilä and Chalker's “Pitfalls in choosing data examples for methodological work: Bayesian approaches to a fixed effects meta‐analysis of zinc lozenges for the common cold”	7
PsychOpen CAMA: Publication of community‐augmented meta‐analyses in psychology	7

Uncertain about uncertainty in matching‐adjusted indirect comparisons? A simulation study to compare methods for variance estimation	7
Issue Information	7
	7
Reverse‐Bayes methods for evidence assessment and research synthesis	7
Network meta analysis to predict the efficacy of an approved treatment in a new indication	7
Issue Information	7
Sensitivity analysis for the interactive effects of internal bias and publication bias in meta‐analyses	7
Issue Information	7