BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Cited by in F6Publishing
For: Burda BU, Holmer HK, Norris SL. Limitations of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) and suggestions for improvement. Syst Rev 2016;5:58. [PMID: 27072548 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-016-0237-1] [Cited by in Crossref: 50] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 44] [Article Influence: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
Number Citing Articles
1 Silva ROS, Macêdo LA, Santos GAD Júnior, Aguiar PM, de Lyra DP Júnior. Pharmacist-participated medication review in different practice settings: Service or intervention? An overview of systematic reviews. PLoS One 2019;14:e0210312. [PMID: 30629654 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210312] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
2 Wu J, Zeng A, Chen Z, Wei Y, Huang K, Chen J, Ren Z. Effects of Virtual Reality Training on Upper Limb Function and Balance in Stroke Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Meta-Analysis. J Med Internet Res 2021;23:e31051. [PMID: 34636735 DOI: 10.2196/31051] [Reference Citation Analysis]
3 Matthias K, Rissling O, Pieper D, Morche J, Nocon M, Jacobs A, Wegewitz U, Schirm J, Lorenz RC. The methodological quality of systematic reviews on the treatment of adult major depression needs improvement according to AMSTAR 2: A cross-sectional study. Heliyon 2020;6:e04776. [PMID: 32939412 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04776] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
4 Zhai K, Gao X, Wang G. Factors for Chinese Students Choosing Australian Higher Education and Motivation for Returning: A Systematic Review. SAGE Open 2019;9:215824401985026. [DOI: 10.1177/2158244019850263] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
5 Pérez E, Braën C, Boyer G, Mercille G, Rehany É, Deslauriers V, Bilodeau A, Potvin L. Neighbourhood community life and health: A systematic review of reviews. Health Place 2020;61:102238. [PMID: 31735517 DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2019.102238] [Cited by in Crossref: 7] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
6 Taha A, Enodien B, Frey DM, Taha-mehlitz S. The Development of Artificial Intelligence in Hernia Surgery: A Scoping Review. Front Surg 2022;9:908014. [DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.908014] [Reference Citation Analysis]
7 Pidgeon TE, Wellstead G, Sagoo H, Jafree DJ, Fowler AJ, Agha RA. An assessment of the compliance of systematic review articles published in craniofacial surgery with the PRISMA statement guidelines: A systematic review. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2016;44:1522-30. [PMID: 27575881 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.07.018] [Cited by in Crossref: 19] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
8 Vaughn K, Skinner M, Vaughn V, Wayant C, Vassar M. Methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews referenced in the clinical practice guideline for pediatric high-blood pressure. Journal of Hypertension 2019;37:488-95. [DOI: 10.1097/hjh.0000000000001870] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
9 Chung VCH, Wu XY, Feng Y, Ho RST, Wong SYS, Threapleton D. Methodological quality of systematic reviews on treatments for depression: a cross-sectional study. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 2018;27:619-27. [PMID: 28462754 DOI: 10.1017/S2045796017000208] [Cited by in Crossref: 7] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
10 Gómez-garcía F, Ruano J, Aguilar-luque M, Gay-mimbrera J, Maestre-lopez B, Sanz-cabanillas J, Carmona-fernández P, González-padilla M, Vélez García-nieto A, Isla-tejera B. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on psoriasis: role of funding sources, conflict of interest and bibliometric indices as predictors of methodological quality. Br J Dermatol 2017;176:1633-44. [DOI: 10.1111/bjd.15380] [Cited by in Crossref: 19] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
11 Estevam JA, Franco ESB, Kriebel CF, Peccin MS. Methodological Quality Analysis of Systematic Review for the Treatment of Rotator Cuff Disease. Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2021;56:485-9. [PMID: 34483393 DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1710334] [Reference Citation Analysis]
12 Shin IS. Recent Research Trends in Meta-analysis. Asian Nurs Res (Korean Soc Nurs Sci). 2017;11:79-83. [PMID: 28688503 DOI: 10.1016/j.anr.2017.05.004] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
13 Genders TS, Ferket BS, Hunink MM. The Quantitative Science of Evaluating Imaging Evidence. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging 2017;10:264-75. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2016.12.010] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
14 Ribeiro ELA, de Mendonça Lima T, Vieira MEB, Storpirtis S, Aguiar PM. Efficacy and safety of aripiprazole for the treatment of schizophrenia: an overview of systematic reviews. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2018;74:1215-33. [PMID: 29905899 DOI: 10.1007/s00228-018-2498-1] [Cited by in Crossref: 20] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 17] [Article Influence: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
15 Bühn S, Ober P, Mathes T, Wegewitz U, Jacobs A, Pieper D. Measuring test-retest reliability (TRR) of AMSTAR provides moderate to perfect agreement - a contribution to the discussion of the importance of TRR in relation to the psychometric properties of assessment tools. BMC Med Res Methodol 2021;21:51. [PMID: 33706710 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-021-01231-y] [Reference Citation Analysis]
16 Ross A, Rankin J, Beaman J, Murray K, Sinnett P, Riddle R, Haskins J, Vassar M. Methodological quality of systematic reviews referenced in clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of opioid use disorder. PLoS One 2017;12:e0181927. [PMID: 28771633 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181927] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
17 Chartres N, Bero LA, Norris SL. A review of methods used for hazard identification and risk assessment of environmental hazards. Environ Int 2019;123:231-9. [PMID: 30537638 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.11.060] [Cited by in Crossref: 18] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
18 Samarasinghe G, Lagisz M, Santamouris M, Yenneti K, Upadhyay AK, De La Peña Suarez F, Taunk B, Nakagawa S. A visualized overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on low-carbon built environments: An evidence review map. Solar Energy 2019;186:291-9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.solener.2019.04.062] [Cited by in Crossref: 9] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
19 Hasan H, Muhammed T, Yu J, Taguchi K, Samargandi OA, Howard AF, Lo AC, Olson R, Goddard K. "Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews in radiation oncology: A systematic review". Cancer Epidemiol 2017;50:141-9. [PMID: 28915472 DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2017.08.013] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
20 Flowers H, Guitard P, King J, Fitzpatrick E, Bérubé D, Barette JA, Cardinal D, Cavallo S, O’neil J, Charette M, Côté L, Gurgel-juarez NC, Toupin-april K, Shallwani SM, Dorion M, Rahman P, Potvin-gilbert M, Bartolini V, Lewis KB, Martini R, Lagacé J, Galipeau R, Ranger M, Duquette-laplante F, Perrier M, Savard J, Paquet N, Tourigny J, Bérubé M, Ba Haroon H, Duong P, Bigras J, Capistran J, Loew L. Traduction franco-canadienne de l’ Assessment of Systematic Reviews Revised (AMSTAR 2) : validation transculturelle et fidélité interjuges. Physiotherapy Canada 2022;74:15-24. [DOI: 10.3138/ptc-2019-0104] [Reference Citation Analysis]
21 Xu C, Liu Y, Zhang C, Kwong JSW, Zhou J, Ge L, Huang J, Liu T. An overview on the methodological and reporting quality of dose–response meta-analysis on cancer prevention. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2019;145:1201-11. [DOI: 10.1007/s00432-019-02869-4] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
22 Pieper D, Jacobs A, Weikert B, Fishta A, Wegewitz U. Inter-rater reliability of AMSTAR is dependent on the pair of reviewers. BMC Med Res Methodol 2017;17:98. [PMID: 28693497 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-017-0380-y] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
23 García-Alamino JM, López-Cano M, Kroese L, Helgstrand F, Muysoms F. Quality Assessment and Risk of Bias of Systematic Reviews of Prophylactic Mesh for Parastomal Hernia Prevention Using AMSTAR and ROBIS Tools. World J Surg 2019;43:3003-12. [PMID: 31440779 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-019-05139-z] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
24 Andersen RD, Langius-eklöf A, Nakstad B, Bernklev T, Jylli L. The measurement properties of pediatric observational pain scales: A systematic review of reviews. International Journal of Nursing Studies 2017;73:93-101. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.05.010] [Cited by in Crossref: 24] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 23] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
25 Pieper D, Koensgen N, Breuing J, Ge L, Wegewitz U. How is AMSTAR applied by authors - a call for better reporting. BMC Med Res Methodol 2018;18:56. [PMID: 29914386 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-018-0520-z] [Cited by in Crossref: 33] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
26 Pieper D, Koensgen N, Breuing J, Ge L, Wegewitz U. How is AMSTAR applied by authors - a call for better reporting. BMC Med Res Methodol 2018;18:56. [PMID: 29914386 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-018-0520-z] [Cited by in Crossref: 30] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 22] [Article Influence: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
27 Faggion CM, Monje A, Wasiak J. Appraisal of systematic reviews on the management of peri-implant diseases with two methodological tools. J Clin Periodontol 2018;45:754-66. [DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.12893] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
28 Chong AB, Taylor M, Schubert G, Vassar M. Interventional Radiology Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations for Neurovascular Disorders Are Not Based on High-Quality Systematic Reviews. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:759-65. [PMID: 28154125 DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5079] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
29 Hagège B, Tan E, Gayraud M, Fautrel B, Gossec L, Mitrovic S. Remission and low disease activity in psoriatic arthritis publications: a systematic literature review with meta-analysis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2020;59:1818-25. [PMID: 32118267 DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keaa030] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
30 Perry R, Whitmarsh A, Leach V, Davies P. A comparison of two assessment tools used in overviews of systematic reviews: ROBIS versus AMSTAR-2. Syst Rev 2021;10:273. [PMID: 34696810 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-021-01819-x] [Reference Citation Analysis]
31 Gómez-García F, Ruano J, Gay-Mimbrera J, Aguilar-Luque M, Sanz-Cabanillas JL, Alcalde-Mellado P, Maestre-López B, Carmona-Fernández PJ, González-Padilla M, García-Nieto AV, Isla-Tejera B. Most systematic reviews of high methodological quality on psoriasis interventions are classified as high risk of bias using ROBIS tool. J Clin Epidemiol 2017;92:79-88. [PMID: 28893571 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.015] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 16] [Article Influence: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
32 Pieper D, Puljak L, González-lorenzo M, Minozzi S. Minor differences were found between AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS in the assessment of systematic reviews including both randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2019;108:26-33. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.12.004] [Cited by in Crossref: 25] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 26] [Article Influence: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
33 Tonin FS, Borba HH, Leonart LP, Mendes AM, Steimbach LM, Pontarolo R, Fernandez-llimos F. Methodological quality assessment of network meta-analysis of drug interventions: implications from a systematic review. International Journal of Epidemiology 2019;48:620-32. [DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyy197] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
34 Nissen T, Wayant C, Wahlstrom A, Sinnett P, Fugate C, Herrington J, Vassar M. Methodological quality, completeness of reporting and use of systematic reviews as evidence in clinical practice guidelines for paediatric overweight and obesity. Clin Obes 2017;7:34-45. [PMID: 28112500 DOI: 10.1111/cob.12174] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
35 Wegewitz U, Weikert B, Fishta A, Jacobs A, Pieper D. Resuming the discussion of AMSTAR: What can (should) be made better? BMC Med Res Methodol 2016;16:111. [PMID: 27566440 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-016-0183-6] [Cited by in Crossref: 34] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 35] [Article Influence: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
36 Banzi R, Cinquini M, Gonzalez-Lorenzo M, Pecoraro V, Capobussi M, Minozzi S. Quality assessment versus risk of bias in systematic reviews: AMSTAR and ROBIS had similar reliability but differed in their construct and applicability. J Clin Epidemiol 2018;99:24-32. [PMID: 29526556 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.02.024] [Cited by in Crossref: 31] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 29] [Article Influence: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
37 Suttle CM, Lawrenson JG, Conway ML. Efficacy of coloured overlays and lenses for treating reading difficulty: an overview of systematic reviews. Clinical and Experimental Optometry 2018;101:514-20. [DOI: 10.1111/cxo.12676] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
38 Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J, Moher D, Tugwell P, Welch V, Kristjansson E, Henry DA. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ. 2017;358:j4008. [PMID: 28935701 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j4008] [Cited by in Crossref: 1571] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1413] [Article Influence: 314.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
39 Huang Z, Kraus V. Reply to Stausholm et al. 's letter to the editor regarding our published study entitled, “Effectiveness of low-level laser therapy in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 2017;25:e11-4. [DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2016.10.015] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
40 Li Q, Li L, Wang R, Zou K, Tian R, Sun X. Methodological quality of systematic reviews used in clinical practice guidelines: focus on clinical imaging. Clin Transl Imaging 2021;9:373-82. [DOI: 10.1007/s40336-021-00433-0] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
41 Gates M, Gates A, Duarte G, Cary M, Becker M, Prediger B, Vandermeer B, Fernandes RM, Pieper D, Hartling L. Quality and risk of bias appraisals of systematic reviews are inconsistent across reviewers and centers. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2020;125:9-15. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.04.026] [Cited by in Crossref: 7] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
42 De Groot K, Triemstra M, Paans W, Francke AL. Quality criteria, instruments, and requirements for nursing documentation: A systematic review of systematic reviews. J Adv Nurs 2019;75:1379-93. [PMID: 30507044 DOI: 10.1111/jan.13919] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
43 Saletta JM, Garcia JJ, Caramês JMM, Schliephake H, da Silva Marques DN. Quality assessment of systematic reviews on vertical bone regeneration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2019;48:364-72. [PMID: 30139710 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2018.07.014] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
44 Lorenz RC, Matthias K, Pieper D, Wegewitz U, Morche J, Nocon M, Rissling O, Schirm J, Jacobs A. A psychometric study found AMSTAR 2 to be a valid and moderately reliable appraisal tool. J Clin Epidemiol 2019;114:133-40. [PMID: 31152864 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.05.028] [Cited by in Crossref: 40] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 39] [Article Influence: 13.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
45 Lambert J, Hayes L, Keegan T, Subar D, Gaffney C. Response to the Comment on "The Impact of Prehabilitation on Patient Outcomes in Hepatobiliary, Colorectal, and Upper Gastro-intestinal Cancer Surgery: A PRISMA-Accordant Meta-analysis". Ann Surg 2021;274:e946-7. [PMID: 34596070 DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005223] [Reference Citation Analysis]
46 Jaca A, Ndze VN, Wiysonge CS. Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews of interventions aimed at improving vaccination coverage using AMSTAR and ROBIS checklists. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2019;15:2824-35. [PMID: 31348722 DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2019.1631567] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
47 Han JL, Gandhi S, Bockoven CG, Narayan VM, Dahm P. The landscape of systematic reviews in urology (1998 to 2015): an assessment of methodological quality. BJU Int 2017;119:638-49. [DOI: 10.1111/bju.13653] [Cited by in Crossref: 25] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 25] [Article Influence: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
48 Pollock A, Campbell P, Brunton G, Hunt H, Estcourt L. Selecting and implementing overview methods: implications from five exemplar overviews. Syst Rev 2017;6:145. [PMID: 28720141 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0534-3] [Cited by in Crossref: 50] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 46] [Article Influence: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
49 Ali NB, Usman M. Reliability of search in systematic reviews: Towards a quality assessment framework for the automated-search strategy. Information and Software Technology 2018;99:133-47. [DOI: 10.1016/j.infsof.2018.02.002] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
50 Zhang F, Shen A, Jin Y, Qiang W. The management strategies of cancer-associated anorexia: a critical appraisal of systematic reviews. BMC Complement Altern Med 2018;18:236. [PMID: 30092794 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-018-2304-8] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
51 Aran G, Hicks C, Demand A, Johnson AL, Beaman J, Bailey Y, Haught M, Lane A, Sinnett P, Vassar M. Treating schizophrenia: the quality of evidence behind treatment recommendations and how it can improve. BMJ Evid Based Med 2020;25:138-42. [PMID: 31672699 DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111233] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
52 De Santis KK, Kaplan I. Assessing the Quality of Systematic Reviews in Healthcare Using AMSTAR and AMSTAR2: A Comparison of Scores on Both Scales. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 2020;228:36-42. [DOI: 10.1027/2151-2604/a000397] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
53 Medley N, Vogel JP, Care A, Alfirevic Z. Interventions during pregnancy to prevent preterm birth: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;11:CD012505. [PMID: 30480756 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012505.pub2] [Cited by in Crossref: 18] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 18] [Article Influence: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
54 Bühn S, Mathes T, Prengel P, Wegewitz U, Ostermann T, Robens S, Pieper D. The risk of bias in systematic reviews tool showed fair reliability and good construct validity. J Clin Epidemiol 2017;91:121-8. [PMID: 28694122 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.019] [Cited by in Crossref: 24] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 23] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
55 Scott J, Howard B, Sinnett P, Schiesel M, Baker J, Henderson P, Vassar M. Variable methodological quality and use found in systematic reviews referenced in STEMI clinical practice guidelines. Am J Emerg Med 2017;35:1828-35. [PMID: 28623004 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2017.06.010] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
56 Pollock M, Fernandes RM, Hartling L. Evaluation of AMSTAR to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews in overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol 2017;17:48. [PMID: 28335734 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-017-0325-5] [Cited by in Crossref: 48] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 43] [Article Influence: 9.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]