The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How Often Do Systematic Reviews Exclude Articles Not Published in English?
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Moreover, Jackson and Kuriyama noticed that only 2% of the articles included in the systematic reviews were published in languages other than English ( Jackson and Kuriyama, 2019 ).”
From The effect of contextual interference on transfer in motor learning - a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as Jackson and Kuriyama, 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Exclusion of non-English literature does not cause systematic bias ( Morrison et al., 2012 ) and the proper and reliable translation from other languages into English may be problematic ( Jackson and Kuriyama, 2019 ).”
From The effect of contextual interference on transfer in motor learning - a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as Jackson and Kuriyama, 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Our search was also limited to studies published in English, which may have introduced bias to the effect estimates and may limit generalisability (Jackson and Kuriyama, 2019).”
From Associations between maternal psychological distress and mother-infant bonding: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Jackson and Kuriyama, 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German
Egger, M., Zellweger-Zähner, T., Schneider, M., Junker, C., Lengeler, C., & Antes, G. (1997) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(97)02419-7 · Cited by 1,028
Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study
Jüni, P., Holenstein, F., Sterne, J., Bartlett, C., & Egger, M. (2002) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/31.1.115 · Cited by 892
Moher, D., Fortin, P. R., Jadad, A. R., Jüni, P., Klassen, T. P., LeLorier, J., Liberati, A., Penna, A., & Linde, K. (1996) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(96)90538-3 · Cited by 539
Grégoire, G., Derderian, F., & LeLorier, J. (1995) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/0895-4356(94)00098-b · Cited by 521
Hartling, L., Featherstone, R. M., Nuspl, M., Shave, K., Dryden, D. M., & Vandermeer, B. (2017) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0347-z · Cited by 348
Wie häufig werden deutschsprachige Medizinzeitschriften in der englischsprachigen Literatur zitiert?
Winkmann, G., Schlutius, S., & Schweim, H. (2002) · DMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift · doi:10.1055/s-2002-19716 · Cited by 18
Winkmann, G., Schlutius, S., & Hg, S. (2002) · PubMed · doi:10.1055/s-2002-23505 · Cited by 13
Winkmann, G., Schlutius, S., & Schweim, H. (2002) · DMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift · doi:10.1055/s-2002-33307 · Cited by 11
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dobrescu, A., Nussbaumer-Streit, B., Klerings, I., Wagner, G., Persad, E., Sommer, I., Herkner, H., & Gartlehner, G. (2021) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.04.012 · Cited by 265
O’Dea, G. A., Youssef, G. J., Hagg, L. J., Francis, L. M., Spry, E. A., Rossen, L., Smith, I., Teague, S. J., Mansour, K., Booth, A., et al. (2023) · Archives of Women's Mental Health · doi:10.1007/s00737-023-01332-1 · Cited by 213
Czyż, S. H., Wójcik, A. M., & Solarská, P. (2024) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1377122 · Cited by 10
“Exclusion of non-English literature does not cause systematic bias (Morrison et al., 2012) and the proper and reliable translation from other languages into English may be problematic (Jackson and Kuriyama, 2019).”
BackgroundInfluential
Metadata
- Authors
- Jackson, J. L., & Kuriyama, A.
- Affiliations
- Medical College of Wisconsin (US)
- Kurashiki Central Hospital (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Jackson, Jeffrey L.
- Venue
- Journal of General Internal Medicine
- Published
- 2019-04-22
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1388-1389
- ISSN
- 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-1497
- PMC
- PMC6667563
- OpenAlex
- W2942241196
- Cited by
- 139
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 2.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of General Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Keywords
- systematic reviews, language restrictions, publication bias, bibliographic database searching
- MeSH terms
- Systematic Reviews as Topic, Humans, Language, Periodicals as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
