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 2021-10-01 to 2025-10-01.)
ArticleCitations
What are the best methods for rapid reviews of the research evidence? A systematic review of reviews and primary studies350
Lord’s Paradox and two network meta-analysis models296
Reported methodological quality of medical systematic reviews: Development of an assessment tool (ReMarQ) and meta-research study168
Advice for improving the reproducibility of data extraction in meta‐analysis138
Assessment of key characteristics, methodology, and effect size measures used in meta‐analysis of human‐health‐related animal studies133
Meta‐analyses of partial correlations are biased: Detection and solutions112
Facilitating open science practices for research syntheses: PreregRS guides preregistration110
A mapping exercise using automated techniques to develop a search strategy to identify systematic review tools83
Towards the automatic risk of bias assessment on randomized controlled trials: A comparison of RobotReviewer and humans73
An investigation of the impact of using contrast- and arm-synthesis models for network meta-analysis72
Accuracy of conversion formula for effect sizes: A Monte Carlo simulation68
47
45
Reporting of Cochrane systematic review protocols with network meta‐analyses—A scoping review42
A comprehensive systematic review dataset is a rich resource for training and evaluation of AI systems for title and abstract screening36
Authors’ reply: Continuity corrections with Mantel–Haenszel estimators in Cochrane reviews33
Synthesis of depression outcomes reported on different scales: A comparison of methods for modelling mean differences33
Correct standard errors can bias meta‐analysis32
Network meta analysis to predict the efficacy of an approved treatment in a new indication30
CausalMetaR: An R package for performing causally interpretable meta-analyses30
Fast‐and‐frugal decision tree for the rapid critical appraisal of systematic reviews28
Exploring graphical approaches to assess the impact of an additional trial on a decision model via updated meta-analysis27
Bias propagation in network meta‐analysis models25
Retrieving Cochrane reviews is sometimes challenging and their reporting is not always optimal25
Evaluation of semi-automated record screening methods for systematic reviews of prognosis studies and intervention studies24
0.80989384651184