Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research

Papers
(The H4-Index of Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research is 18. 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
Cost–effectiveness of pembrolizumab for second-line treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients with a combined positive score of 10 or more146
Acute effects of resistance exercise with blood flow restriction on cardiovascular response: a meta-analysis42
Effect of home-based exercise programs with e-devices on falls among community-dwelling older adults: a meta-analysis41
Engaging veterans in the research process: a practical guide36
An observational cohort study of pelvic floor photobiomodulation for treatment of chronic pelvic pain28
Long-term effectiveness and safety of ravulizumab in paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria: a plain language summary28
Atezolizumab with chemotherapy in first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer: a cost–effectiveness analysis25
Smart connected insulin dose monitoring technologies versus standard of care: a Canadian cost–effectiveness analysis22
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research : 2022 year in review22
Economic burden of sickle cell disease in the United States: a retrospective analysis of a commercial insurance database22
MOMENT registry: Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer harboring MET exon 14 skipping treated with systemic therapy21
Postoperative outcomes and anesthesia type in total knee arthroplasty in patients with obstructive sleep apnea20
Discharges against medical advice and 30-day healthcare costs: an analysis of commercially insured adults20
Corrigendum20
Impact of clinical research coordinators on research output in orthopedic surgery19
Costs associated with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis disease progression in Medicare patients: a retrospective cohort study19
Cost–effectiveness analysis of a resource-intensive approach versus minimally invasive strategy for high-risk transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients19
R WE ready for reimbursement? A round up of developments in real-world evidence relating to health technology assessment: part 2019
0.092472076416016