Keeping Up With the Medical Literature: Why, How, and When?
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Literature screening is the most time-consuming process in evidence synthesis practice, particularly in the medical field.
“Literature screening is the most time-consuming process in evidence synthesis practice, particularly in the medical field [9–11]”
From Artificial intelligence for the science of evidence synthesis: how good are AI-powered tools for automatic literature screening? (2025) · cites this paper as [11]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 6 · Cited by 32
- Authors
- Kamtchum-Tatuene, J., & Zafack, J. G.
- Affiliations
- The Neuroscience and Mental Health Institute, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada (J.K.-T.).
- Public Health Agency of Canada (CA)
- Venue
- Stroke
- Published
- 2021-11
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- e746-e748
- ISSN
- 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4628
- OpenAlex
- W3203641451
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4
- FWCI
- 3.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Stroke (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- medical literature, evidence-based medicine
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Medical Informatics
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
