Duplicates in systematic reviews: A critical, but often neglected issue

doi:10.13105/wjma.v1.i3.97

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 1, Issue 3

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (8681)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, HTML series, Figures (1-6) series.

Item

Count

PDF

424

HTML

6437

Figures (1-6)

243

Sum=7104

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

830

Download

747

Sum=1577

Nov 26, 2013 (publication date) through Nov 5, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (8)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Meta-Analysis

ISSN

2308-3840

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Minireviews

World J Meta-Anal. Nov 26, 2013; 1(3): 97-101
Published online Nov 26, 2013. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v1.i3.97

Full Size Figure Download Figure

Figure 2 The prevalence of duplicates reported in four systematic reviews conducted by our team. 1: Qi JGH (2013); 2: Bai JGH (2013); 3: Qi AJM (2013); 4: Qi PlosOne (2013) PVT; 5: Qi PlosOne (2013) BCS.

Citation: Qi XS, Bai M, Yang ZP, Ren WR. Duplicates in systematic reviews: A critical, but often neglected issue. World J Meta-Anal 2013; 1(3): 97-101
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2308-3840/full/v1/i3/97.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.13105/wjma.v1.i3.97