The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 7 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
De-duplication of database search results for systematic reviews in EndNote
Open accessAbstract
When conducting exhaustive searches for systematic reviews, information professionals search multiple databases with overlapping content [1][2][3][4].They typically remove duplicate records to reduce the reviewers' workload associated with screening titles and abstracts; sometimes the reviewers remove the duplicates.Several articles have been published recently on de-duplication methods.In the authors' opinion, these methods are either very time consuming [5] or impractical, as they require uploading large files to an online platform [6,7].A recent overview article compared existing software programs but found that none was truly satisfactory [8].Unique identifiers for journal articles are digital object identifiers (DOIs) and PubMed IDs (PMIDs).However, these identifiers are not present in every database.When they are present, they often cannot be exported easily.Thus, they cannot be relied upon to identify duplicates.An alternative involves using pagination, because the often large page numbers in scientific journals, in combination with other fields, can serve as a type of unique identifier.However, this is complicated by variations in the way page numbers are stored.Most biomedical databases use a long format (e.g.,
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This paper describes a detailed EndNote-based method for de-duplicating search results in systematic reviews, using page-number normalization and multiple field-comparison passes. The authors argue it is more systematic and reproducible than other approaches, with reduced manual checking and lower error rates, but it is tailored to EndNote and still fairly complex.
Key findings
- The method has three stages: change field/display settings, import records through a temporary library and adapted export/import filters, then run several duplicate-detection passes with different field settings and remove probable duplicates.
- The authors state that the time spent de-duplicating references and the error rate are “significantly reduced” because only a small subset of records needs manual assessment.
- The method relies on pagination because DOIs and PMIDs are not present in every database and often cannot be exported easily; the paper notes that most biomedical databases use long page-number formats (e.g., 1008-1012) while MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library use abbreviated formats (e.g., 1008-12).
- Table 1 lays out multiple duplicate-removal settings, including field combinations such as Author | Year | Title | Secondary (Journal) | Press, Delete, and other combinations involving Pages, Volume, and Issue.
Methods
- Design: A methods/tool article describing an EndNote workflow for de-duplication; the method was previously presented in a brief conference paper and is here described in detail for EndNote X7.
- Data/sample: Not an empirical sample; the paper discusses importing references from databases including PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library, and notes customized import filters for Embase.com, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Scopus.
- Main analysis: The workflow compares records across multiple field combinations in EndNote, after normalizing page-number formats via custom export/import filters, and uses repeated duplicate-finding steps plus manual checking of subsets to remove false duplicates.
Limitations
- The paper states the method is tuned to EndNote; it notes that Reference Manager was tried but “failed” because too many false duplicates were removed, and Reference Manager is no longer sold/support is likely discontinued.
- The paper says the method is “rather complicated” and has a “steep” learning curve. This is a limitation stated by the authors.
- Evident from the text: the method depends on databases exporting usable page numbers and journal-title formats, and the authors note that differences across databases and changes such as Cochrane’s switch to abbreviated page numbers and CINAHL’s page-length suffixes complicate the workflow.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
11 Own interpretation · 3 Sources not found · 2 No basis given · 1 Supported so far · 1 Own result
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“When conducting exhaustive searches for systematic reviews, information professionals search multiple databases with overlapping content [1-4].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1] 1. Levay P, Raynor M, Tuvey D. The contributions of MEDLINE, other bibliographic databases and various
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [2]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [3] 3. Lorenzetti DL, Topfer LA, Dennett L, Clement F. Value of databases other than MEDLINE for rapid health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assessment Health Care. 2014;30(02):173-8. source
- Supportedcites [4] 4. Beyer FR, Wright K. Can we prioritise which databases to search? a case study using a systematic review of frozen shoulder management. Health Inf Libr J. 2013; 30(1):49-58. source
The Abstract says that comprehensive searches for systematic reviews use multiple databases and that searching and screening their results can be resource-intensive. The Comparison with previous work section describes substantial overlap in trials found across CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE. Together, these support the cited background statement. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, when we tried our method in Reference Manager, it failed: too many false duplicates were removed.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The only alternative software to EndNote in which the fields that are to be compared in the de-duplication process can be changed is Reference Manager, also provided by Thomson Reuters [14].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [14] 14. Reference Manager. Version 12. Thomson Reuters; 2008.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The limitation of this method is that it is tuned to EndNote”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Reference Manager allows comparisons by start pages.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [14] 14. Reference Manager. Version 12. Thomson Reuters; 2008.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, they cannot be relied upon to identify duplicates.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: DOIs and PMIDs are not present in every database.
- Rests on an assumption: When DOIs and PMIDs are present, they often cannot be exported easily.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 10
- It may state two separate claims as one. 5
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“however, in older versions, step 2 in the third column of rows C and D in Table 1 will not work as desired because duplicate references are not highlighted.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It will also work in earlier versions (versions X3 and higher)”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If performed frequently, librarian-mediated de-duplication services can be faster than current methods and less error prone.”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A recent overview article compared existing software programs but found that none was truly satisfactory [8].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [8]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, simplification of the method (e.g., by reducing the number of different field combinations or by not normalizing page numbers) increases the workload by increasing the number of references to manually assess.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The comparison of start page numbers in Reference Manager appears to be flawed; therefore, tailoring by our method for Reference Manager is not a good alternative.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The time spent de-duplicating references and the error rate are significantly reduced because just a small subset of the search results has to be assessed manually.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The last two steps require some additional manual assessment, but screening by page numbers expedites the work, and the number of references to assess is lower than in other methods.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A requisite of this method is that for efficient deduplication, page numbers should include both a start and an end page.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The method described in this paper is for the most recent version of EndNote for Windows, version X7.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The method's strength is based on the specificity of the first two steps, which require no manual assessment.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although this is not strictly necessary, it improves the sensitivity of the first step and, thus, reduces the number of references that have to be checked manually.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Information professionals typically remove duplicate records to reduce the reviewers' workload associated with screening titles and abstracts; sometimes the reviewers remove the duplicates.
“They typically remove duplicate records to reduce the reviewers' workload associated with screening titles and abstracts; sometimes the reviewers remove the duplicates.”
The paper relies on this without support.
DOIs and PMIDs are not present in every database.
“However, these identifiers are not present in every database.”
The paper relies on this without support.
When DOIs and PMIDs are present, they often cannot be exported easily.
“When they are present, they often cannot be exported easily.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Page numbers, in combination with other fields, can serve as a type of unique identifier.
“An alternative involves using pagination, because the often large page numbers in scientific journals, in combination with other fields, can serve as a type of unique identifier.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Variations in the way page numbers are stored complicate using pagination.
“However, this is complicated by variations in the way page numbers are stored.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Most biomedical databases use a long page number format (e.g., 1008-1012).
“Most biomedical databases use a long format (e.g., 1008-1012)”
The paper relies on this without support.
MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library use an abbreviated page number format (e.g., 1008-12).
“two important databases (MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library) use an abbreviated one (e.g., 1008-12).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The de-duplication method designed for EndNote is more systematic, rigorous, and reproducible than procedures regularly carried out by other information professionals.
“Although the de-duplication method that we designed for EndNote resembles procedures regularly carried out by other information professionals, it is more systematic, rigorous, and reproducible.”
The paper relies on this without support.
EndNote is commonly used to manage bibliographic records.
“however, EndNote is commonly used to manage bibliographic records.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Reference Manager is no longer for sale, and support for Reference Manager will likely be discontinued.
“Additionally, Reference Manager is no longer for sale, and support for Reference Manager will likely be discontinued.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Databases differ in the format of the exported journal titles.
“Databases also differ in the format of the exported journal titles.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Some databases use abbreviations, while others provide full journal titles.
“Some databases use abbreviations, while others provide full journal titles.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Cochrane recently switched from exporting full page numbers to abbreviated page numbers.
“Cochrane recently switched from exporting full page numbers to abbreviated page numbers”
The paper relies on this without support.
CINAHL recently appended the length of the article in the fields for page numbers (e.g., in the format 1008-1012 5p).
“CINAHL recently appended the length of the article in the fields for page numbers (e.g., in the format 1008-1012 5p).”
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
“When combined with human validation, adding import filters for various databases, following specific configurations in EndNote, and considering specific order of metadata import increases sensitivity [ 12 ]”
From Reducing systematic review burden using Deduklick: a novel, automated, reliable, and explainable deduplication algorithm to foster medical research (2022) · cites this paper as [12]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“When searching in multiple databases and additional information sources, as is necessary for a systematic review, authors often employ a variety of techniques to reduce the number of duplicates within their results prior to screening [135 -138].”
From PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews (2021) · cites this paper as [136]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Techniques vary in their efficacy, sensitivity, and specificity (Table 2) [136, 138].”
From PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews (2021) · cites this paper as [136]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The database has been cleared of duplicates using Endnote 21 through the de-duplication method detailed in Bramer et al. (2016).”
From Digital material passports in the AEC industry: a scoping review and conceptualisation of future research challenges (2025) · cites this paper as Bramer et al. (2016)
In the citing paper
“Duplicate articles were excluded by a medical information specialist (LS) using Endnote X20.4 (Clarivate™), following the Amsterdam Efficient Deduplication (AED) method and the Bramer-method (Bramer et al., 2016; Otten et al., 2019).”
From The pursuit for markers of disease progression in behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia: a scoping review to optimize outcome measures for clinical trials (2024) · cites this paper as Bramer et al., 2016
Citations
Cites
Rathbone, J., Carter, M., Hoffmann, T., & Glasziou, P. (2015) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-4-6 · Cited by 206
Identifying and removing duplicate records from systematic review searches
Kwon, Y., Lemieux, M., McTavish, J., & Wathen, N. (2015) · Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · doi:10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.004 · Cited by 178 · cited 1×
“A recent overview article compared existing software programs but found that none was truly satisfactory [8].”
Find Duplicates among the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library Databases in Systematic Review
Qi, X., Yang, M., Ren, W., Jia, J., Wang, J., Han, G., & Fan, D. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0071838 · Cited by 98
Beyer, F. R., & Wright, K. (2013) · Health Information & Libraries Journal · doi:10.1111/hir.12009 · Cited by 47
Rule-based deduplication of article records from bibliographic databases
Jiang, Y., Lin, C., Meng, W., Yu, C., Cohen, A. M., & Smalheiser, N. R. (2014) · Database · doi:10.1093/database/bat086 · Cited by 41 · cited 1×
“In the authors’ opinion, these methods are either very time consuming [5] or impractical, as they require uploading large files to an online platform [6, 7].”
VALUE OF DATABASES OTHER THAN MEDLINE FOR RAPID HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTS
Lorenzetti, D. L., Topfer, L.-A., Dennett, L., & Clement, F. (2014) · International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care · doi:10.1017/s0266462314000166 · Cited by 30
Levay, P., Raynor, M., & Tuvey, D. (2015) · Evidence Based Library and Information Practice · doi:10.18438/b82p55 · Cited by 26
Information Retrieval in Telemedicine: a Comparative Study on Bibliographic Databases
Ahmadi, M., Sarabi, R. E., Orak, R. J., & Bahaadinbeigy, K. (2015) · Acta Informatica Medica · doi:10.5455/aim.2015.23.172-176 · Cited by 8
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- [2]2. search techniques to NICE public health guidance. Evid Based Libr Inf Pract. 2015;10(1):50-68.
- [9]9. Bramer WM, Holland L, Mollema J, Hannon T, Bekhuis - T. Removing duplicates in retrieval sets from electronic databases: comparing the efficiency and accuracy of the Bramer-method with other methods and software packages. Proceedings of the 14th European Association for Health Information and Libraries (EAHIL) Conference, 57-9; Rome, Italy; 11-13 Jun 2014.
- [11]11. National Library of Medicine. PubMed [Internet]. The Library; 2016 [cited 4 Feb 2016]. , http://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pubmed/ . .
- [12]12. Ovid MEDLINE [Internet]. Wolters Kluwer; 2016 [cited 4 Feb 2016]. , http://site.ovid.com/pdf/ OvidMedline\_fs.pdf . .
- [13]13. Cochrane. Cochrane Library [Internet]. John Wiley & Sons; 2016 [cited 4 Feb 2016]. , http://www. cochranelibrary.com . .
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,201–1,300 of 1,918
Jochimsen, K. N., Doorley, J. D., Monnin, J., Cohen, J. E., Robinson, H., Vasileff, W. K., Jacobs, C. A., Stasi, S. D., & Vranceanu, A. (2025) · PM&R · doi:10.1002/pmrj.70015 · Cited by 5
Varela, A. M. G., da Costa, W. P., Batista, D. R. O., Carvalho, V. S., Piura, W. P., & Cunha, L. C. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0335523 · Cited by 5
“Duplicates will be removed following Bramer’s method [54], and we will conduct a manual review to confirm their exclusion [52,55].”
Leite, J. H., Setti, D., & de Resende, L. M. M. (2025) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-025-05485-x · Cited by 5
“This step preserves the integrity of the dataset, preventing biases in the analysis caused by repetitions (Bramer et al., 2016; Higgins et al., 2023; Page et al., 2021).”
Hadani, Y., Tarikogullari, I., Oesterle, T., McGinnis, M. T., Nidey, N., Lai, B., Kalata, A. H., Sharma, P., & Bormann, N. L. (2025) · American Journal on Addictions · doi:10.1111/ajad.70104 · Cited by 3
Support Strategies and Interventions for eHealth Inclusion: Scoping Review
Bouwes, W., Scherpbier, N. D., Hage, E., Tjalma, L. A. R., & Metting, E. (2025) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/79760 · Cited by 4
Howe, M.-S., & Richards, D. (2025) · Journal of Dentistry · doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2025.106299 · Cited by 3
Mapping Modern Slavery in the Context of the 2030 Agenda: A Scoping Review Protocol
Neres, A. P. C., Traguetto, J., da Costa, W. P., Torres, M. D. M., & Sousa, M. D. M. (2025) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/16094069251405086 · Cited by 3
“Methods (Bramer et al., 2016).”
Fattahi, N., Stenman, M., & Hultgren, R. (2025) · European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2025.12.044 · Cited by 3
The association between pressure injury microbiome and wound healing: a systematic review
Schmandt, C., Llukovi, E., Capossela, S., Wettstein, R., Valido, E. M., Gamba, M., Perret, C., Stoyanov, J. V., & Bertolo, A. (2026) · Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fcimb.2025.1703418 · Cited by 3
“Search results from all databases were imported into a single EndNote library (EndNote, Clarivate, v. 20.0.1), where duplicates were removed following Bramer ’ s method (Bramer et al., 2016).”
InfluentialMuishout, G., Post, L., Ayachi, S. E., et al. (2026) · Palliative Medicine · doi:10.1177/02692163251407877 · Cited by 3
“18,19 Mendeley was used to organize the collected data, ensuring a systematic approach.”
Liu, K., Meng, G., Li, C., Wang, S., Fan, X., & Chen, Q. (2026) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-026-04163-6 · Cited by 3
“First, we identified and removed duplicate articles [ 32].”
A systematic review of neurodivergence, vulnerability, and risk in the context of violent extremism
Salman, N. L., & Al-Attar, Z. (2025) · Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology · doi:10.1080/14789949.2025.2606393 · Cited by 3
“…the title, abstract, and metadata of each document) were deduplicated automatically by the search platform where possible, then downloaded and saved to a reference manager (EndNote), through which further duplicate records were identified and removed based on Bramer et al.‘s (2016) method.”
van Vugt, W. L. J., van den Boogaard, E., van der Tuuk, K., et al. (2026) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2026.01.036 · Cited by 3
Bloomfield, P. M., Connell, C. J. W., Shaw, D. M., Fan, J., Fisher, J. P., & Gant, N. (2026) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2026.106603 · Cited by 3
Rıaz, R., Waqas, M., Nouman, H. M., Imtiaz, B., Mohamed, R. A. E. H., Maqsood, H., Mehmood, Z., Cieślak, A., Liu, L., & Zhao, C. (2026) · Poultry Science · doi:10.1016/j.psj.2026.106814 · Cited by 3
“All retrieved records were uploaded to EndNote, and duplicates were removed (Bramer et al., 2016).”
de Moraes, F. M. B., Tortorella, G. L., & Trianni, A. (2026) · International Journal of Lean Six Sigma · doi:10.1108/ijlss-03-2025-0062 · Cited by 3
Liçenji, L., & Hoxha, J. (2026) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2026.1815243 · Cited by 8
“This approach is consistent with established deduplication recommendations for systematic reviews (Bramer et al., 2016) (Table 2).”
Trujillo-Cáceres, S. J., Roa‐Díaz, Z. M., Figueroa, C., Vargas, J. A. H., Rojas, L. Z., Lora, A. M. A., Raeisi‐Dehkordi, H., Beigrezaei, S., Arita, V. A., Verschuren, W. M. M., et al. (2026) · Maturitas · doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2026.108976 · Cited by 3
Ebenezer, V., Ganesh, P., & Vinayagar, M. (2026) · Frontiers in Oral Health · doi:10.3389/froh.2026.1790589 · Cited by 6
“Identified records were imported into reference management software and duplicates removed (49).”
Patterson, P. D., Mcilvaine, Q. S., Nong, L., Liszka, M. K., Miller, R. S., Guyette, F. X., & Martin‐Gill, C. (2022) · Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open · doi:10.1002/emp2.12699 · Cited by 3
van Spreuwel, P. C. J. M., Munk-Overkamp, M. L. C., Smit, L. C., Ziesemer, K. A., van Loveren, C., van der Heijden, G. J. M. G., Bruers, J. J. M., & Jerković‐Ćosić, K. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0275501 · Cited by 3
“Duplicates will be removed using the Amsterdam Efficient Deduplication and Bramer methods [18, 19].”
MethodChowdhury, A. R., Kim, J. S., Xu, M., et al. (2023) · Endoscopy International Open · doi:10.1055/a-2150-9899 · Cited by 3
“…information was extracted: author, title, journal, year, study country, type of study, type of EMR (underwater versus conventional) for colorectal lesions, total number of patients and number of patients in each study group, total number of polyps and number of polyps in each outcome group.”
Wang, R. S., Zhou, C., & Parry, M. J. E. (2023) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075277 · Cited by 3
“25 After removing duplications, all remaining citations will be imported into Covi-dence for the subsequent review.”
MethodJakobsson, S., Envall, I., Bengtsson, J., et al. (2024) · Environmental Evidence · doi:10.1186/s13750-024-00343-4 · Cited by 3
“Duplicates were removed using the de-duplication method described by Bramer et al. [37].”
MethodRose, M. L., Sachdeva, R., Mezgueldi, Y., et al. (2024) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.07.2335 · Cited by 3
Idiopathic Subglottic Stenosis in Non‐Caucasian Women
Suk, A., Dehom, S. O., Punjabi, N. A., Young, V. N., Krishna, P. D., Reder, L. S., O'Dell, K. D., Gochman, G. E., Simmons, E., Verma, S. P., et al. (2024) · OTO Open · doi:10.1002/oto2.180 · Cited by 3
“Deduplication was conducted using the methodology established by Bramer et al. 16”
MethodExploring Prognostic Implications of Race and Ethnicity in Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease
Léveillé, N., Provost, H., Kamani, C. K., Chen, M., Manshadi, S. D., Ades, M., Shanahan, K., Nauche, B., & Drudi, L. M. (2024) · Journal of Surgical Research · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2024.07.120 · Cited by 4
Kokorelias, K. M., Chau, V., Wijekoon, S., Singh, H., & Harris, M. T. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0307939 · Cited by 5
Paudel, R., Dias, S. L., Wade, C. G., Cronin, C. M., & Hassett, M. J. (2024) · JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics · doi:10.1200/cci-24-00145 · Cited by 6
Oldfrey, B. M., Ramírez, D. Z. M., Holloway, C., et al. (2024) · Prosthetics and Orthotics International · doi:10.1097/pxr.0000000000000399 · Cited by 3
“17 After deduplication using the Bramer method, 18 the titles and abstracts of the remaining articles were imported into Rayyan.”
Abortion and well-being: A narrative literature review
Coast, E., Nandagiri, R., Fry, A., Almada, M. D., Johnston, H. B., Atay, H., Ganatra, B., Lavelanet, A. F., Alhassan, N., Banke-Thomas, A. O., et al. (2024) · SSM - Qualitative Research in Health · doi:10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100508 · Cited by 3
Cera, M. L., Bertolucci, P. H. F., Ramos, N. C. D. C., Corrêa, C. D. C., Vilela, C. D. R. P., & Ortiz, K. Z. (2024) · Journal of Alzheimer s Disease Reports · doi:10.1177/25424823241290698 · Cited by 3
Geusebroek, G., Buczny, J., Houdijk, H., et al. (2024) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2024.12.004 · Cited by 3
Belal, M. M., Alazki, O., Bashir, M. N., et al. (2025) · Indian Journal of Anaesthesia · doi:10.4103/ija.ija_862_24 · Cited by 3
“[12] Subsequently, four separate reviewers (MNB, OA, DA, FA) screened the titles and abstracts using Rayyan, with their decisions being double-checked for accuracy.”
Mahomedradja, R. F., Wang, S., Sigaloff, K., Tichelaar, J., & van Agtmael, M. A. (2025) · Expert Opinion on Drug Safety · doi:10.1080/14740338.2025.2467831 · Cited by 3
“0.1 (Clarivate tm ), according to the Amsterdam Efficient Deduplication (AED) method [28] and the Bramer method [29].”
InfluentialWhat delivery-related factors affect postpartum recovery? A systematic review
Frijmersum, Z. Z., van der Meij, E., Bakker, P., et al. (2025) · AJOG Global Reports · doi:10.1016/j.xagr.2025.100496 · Cited by 3
Hoogstad, A., Peters-Scheffer, N. C., Rouleaux, M., Mevissen, L., Versluis, A., & Didden, R. (2025) · Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s41252-025-00441-5 · Cited by 4
“The studies were imported in EndNote 20, and duplicates were digitally removed by the first author according to the steps of Bramer et al. (2016), after which this was manually checked by the first and second authors.”
Agrawal, V., Ali, M., Yasin, F., et al. (2025) · Global Spine Journal · doi:10.1177/21925682251339480 · Cited by 3
Keen, S., Sall, K., Koczo, A., Wang, Y., Miller, R. S., Muldoon, M. F., Hauspurg, A. K., & Countouris, M. E. (2025) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.124.24263 · Cited by 3
Acute and chronic exercise-conditioned serum effects on cancer cells in vitro: a systematic review
Bettariga, F., Taaffe, D. R., Borsati, A., Avancini, A., Pilotto, S., Lazzarini, S. G., Galvao, D. A., & Newton, R. U. (2026) · European Journal of Cancer Prevention · doi:10.1097/cej.0000000000000968 · Cited by 3
McIntosh, A., & Pontius, J. A. (2016) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-801712-8.00001-9 · Cited by 3
EFFECTS OF HAPPINESS TRAINING ON MENTAL HEALTH IN ADULTS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Khodabakhsh, S. (2021) · International Journal of Education Psychology and Counseling · doi:10.35631/ijepc.638009 · Cited by 3
“During the screening process, 4 articles were removed after de-duplicating using EndNote (Bramer et al., 2016).”
Bérubé-Mercier, P., Tapp, D., Cimon, M.-È., Li, T., Park, S. B., Bouhêlier, É., McGarragle, K., Robichaud, L.-A., Gewandter, J. S., Bouchard, M., et al. (2022) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057950 · Cited by 3
Elfanagely, Y., Tanzer, J. R., Shobayo, A., et al. (2022) · Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology · doi:10.1017/ice.2022.217 · Cited by 3
Dubreucq, J., Kamperman, A. M., Al-Maach, N., Bramer, W. M., Pacheco, F., Ganho-Ávila, A., & den Berg, M. P. L. (2022) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057327 · Cited by 3
Self-citationAtaman, R., Thomas, A., Roberge‐Dao, J., McKerral, M., Auger, C., Wittich, W., Talla, P. K., Boychuck, Z., & Ahmed, S. (2022) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2022.08.051 · Cited by 3
McCabe, C., Sica, A., Doody, N., & Fortune, D. G. (2023) · Neuropsychological Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09602011.2023.2186437 · Cited by 3
“Search results were exported to EndNote where duplicates were removed following Bramer et al. (2016) ’ s deduplication process.”
MethodOccupational therapy in multiple sclerosis
Kos, D., Eijssen, I. C. J. M., Bekkering, G. E., Coninck, L. D., O'Meara, C., Koen, M., & Hynes, S. M. (2023) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd015371 · Cited by 3
Vujcich, D., Roberts, M., Selway, T., & Nattabi, B. (2023) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph20095708 · Cited by 4
“The results yielded in database searches were exported into a reference management system and deduplicated using the process developed by Bramer and colleagues [20,21].”
MethodMartínez-Navarro, O., Climent‐Sanz, C., Lletja-Guijarro, A., Arab, R. A. E., Verdejo-Amengual, F. J., & Valenzuela‐Pascual, F. (2023) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070012 · Cited by 3
Rocca, A., Gkaniatsa, E., Brunese, M. C., et al. (2023) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072585 · Cited by 3
Evaluating the state of non-invasive imaging biomarkers for traumatic brain injury
Pugazenthi, S., Hernandez‐Rovira, M. A., Mitha, R., Rogers, J. L., Lavadi, R. S., Kann, M. R., Ruiz-Cardozo, M. A., Hardi, A., Elsayed, G. A., Joseph, J. R., et al. (2023) · Neurosurgical Review · doi:10.1007/s10143-023-02085-2 · Cited by 3
“Likewise, recent studies have explored the use of cerebral microdialysis to ascertain metabolite levels present in the injured areas of the brain, providing insight into physiologic conditions [15].”
Cho, S., Goff, B. A., & Berry, D. L. (2023) · Journal of Pain and Symptom Management · doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2023.09.019 · Cited by 3
Bebbington, E., Ramesh, P., McPhillips, R., et al. (2023) · Burns · doi:10.1016/j.burns.2023.10.008 · Cited by 3
Bhasin, S., Brown, J. K., Dorste, A., et al. (2024) · Pediatric Blood & Cancer · doi:10.1002/pbc.30881 · Cited by 3
“All searches were run on the same day (January 6, 2023), and de-duplicated using the validated EndNote de-duplication method by Bramer et al. 19 All results were then imported into Covidence systematic review software.”
MethodLundh, M. G., Nordentoft, S., Smedegaard, P. S., Aadal, L., Loft, M. I., Poulsen, I., & Guldager, R. (2024) · Journal of Clinical Nursing · doi:10.1111/jocn.17328 · Cited by 3
“The database search results were imported into EndNote 20 (Clarivate Analytics PA, USA) and duplicates were removed in ac - cordance with the methods described by Bramer et al. ( 2016 ).”
Barnes, N. A., Sharath, S., Dkhar, W., et al. (2024) · Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health · doi:10.1016/j.cegh.2024.101760 · Cited by 3
Forsyth, F., Deaton, C., Kalra, P. R., Green, M., Harrison, M., Tavares, S., Dirksen, A., Kuhn, I. L., Farquharson, B., & Austin, R. C. (2024) · European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing · doi:10.1093/eurjcn/zvae119 · Cited by 3
“45 The search strategy was evaluated against the PRISMA-S guidelines.”
Experiences of internationally educated nurses working with older adults: A scoping review protocol
Kokorelias, K. M., Saragosa, M., Abdelhalim, R., Philippopoulos, E., & Vo, A. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0307795 · Cited by 3
“Articles identified from the search will first be deduplicated using the Bramer method in End-note reference management software [64, 65].”
MethodPatel, N. B., Cojuc‐Konigsberg, G., García-Guáqueta, D. P., Shah, D., Balasubramaniam, D., Mahajan, A., Shakuntulla, F., Gerberi, D., Cuervo‐Pardo, L., Park, M. A., et al. (2024) · The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology In Practice · doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2024.10.031 · Cited by 4
Prevalence of Weapons in the Health Care Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
McGuire, S. S., Clements, C. M., Gerberi, D., & Murad, M. H. (2024) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings Innovations Quality & Outcomes · doi:10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2024.11.004 · Cited by 4
Utari, A., Silberkasten, M., Musa, S. A., Hassan, S. S., Sharma, R., Bramer, W. M., van der Zwan, Y. G., & Drop, S. L. S. (2024) · Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology · doi:10.1080/02646838.2024.2439926 · Cited by 3
“Duplicates were discarded using the Bramer method in Endnote (Bramer et al., 2016).”
Self-citationCultural Humility Practices in Occupational Therapy Services: A Scoping Review
Kokorelias, K. M., Wu, V., Colquhoun, H. L., Sangrar, R., Wijekoon, S., Nelson, M. L. A., Assaf, H., Ramachandran, M., & Singh, H. (2025) · American Journal of Occupational Therapy · doi:10.5014/ajot.2025.050738 · Cited by 3
“The information specialist translated and ran the search in Ovid Step 3: Study Selection The results of the database literature search were de-duplicated using reference management and systematic review management software (EndNote and Covidence; Bramer et al., 2016).”
Liu, H., Zhang, Y., Wang, Y., Pang, K., Xi, W., Zou, L., He, K., Wang, Q., & Huang, L. (2025) · Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology · doi:10.1177/17562848251324227 · Cited by 3
Lambert, S., Audet, L., Brahim, L. O., Schaffler, J. L., Ramírez, C. T., Frati, F. Y. E., Sangha, S., Howard, A. F., & Lambert, L. K. (2025) · Cancer Control · doi:10.1177/10732748251339217 · Cited by 4
da Costa, W. P., Torres, H. D. C., Sarti, T. D., Almeida, A. P. S. C., Batista, S. R., & de Abreu, L. C. (2025) · MethodsX · doi:10.1016/j.mex.2025.103628 · Cited by 4
“Duplicates will be removed following Bramer ’ s method [34], and a manual review will be conducted to confirm their exclusion [32,35].”
Low-value clinical practices in adult traumatic brain injury: an umbrella review protocol
Tardif, P., Moore, L., Lauzier, F., Farhat, I., Archambault, P. M., Lamontagne, F., Chassé, M., Stelfox, H. T., Gabbe, B. J., Lecky, F. E., et al. (2019) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031747 · Cited by 3
“We will identify and remove duplicates using electronic and manual screening.(34) To ensure reliability when selecting studies for a given”
MethodTran, N., Tran, M., Elgabalawy, E., et al. (2020) · Journal of Pediatric Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.pedn.2020.08.016 · Cited by 3
McCarty, G., Derrett, S., Sullivan, T. A., Crengle, S. M., & Wyeth, E. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043973 · Cited by 5
Haase, K. R., Puts, M. T. E., Sattar, S., Gray, M., Kenis, C., Donison, V., Hall, S., McLean, B., Wills, A., & Howell, D. (2020) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-020-01346-1 · Cited by 3
Meehan, E., Gallagher, A., Ryan, J. M., Kerr, C., Sullivan, R. O., Galvin, R., Manikandan, M., Wormald, A., & Robinson, K. (2021) · HRB Open Research · doi:10.12688/hrbopenres.13309.1 · Cited by 3
Ho, P. T. N., Bich, T. H. P., Tong, T., Bramer, W. M., Hofman, A., Lubans, D. R., Vernooij, M. W., & Rodríguez‐Ayllón, M. (2022) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058737 · Cited by 2
Self-citationMartin, A. C., Assmann, J. J., Bradshaw, R., Kuoppamaa, M. S., Kuosmanen, N., Normand, S., Speed, J. D. M., & Macias‐Fauria, M. (2022) · Environmental Evidence · doi:10.1186/s13750-022-00267-x · Cited by 3
“(2016), accounting for differences in page number formatting between databases [67].”
BackgroundVargas‐Fernández, R., Chacón-Díaz, M., Basualdo-Meléndez, G. W., et al. (2022) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059610 · Cited by 3
Patty, N. J. S., van Meeteren, K., Willemen, A. M., Verdonk, M., Mol, M., Ketelaar, M., & Schuengel, C. (2021) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/754yp · Cited by 3
Voice as a Biomarker of Pediatric Health: A Scoping ReviewPreprint
Rogers, H. P., Hseu, A. F., Kim, J. E., Silberholz, E., Jo, S., Dorste, A., & Jenkins, K. J. (2024) · Preprints.org · doi:10.20944/preprints202405.0889.v1 · Cited by 3
The effect of combining antibiotics on resistance: A systematic review and meta-analysisPreprint
Siedentop, B., Kachalov, V. N., Witzany, C., Egger, M., Kouyos, R. D., & Bonhoeffer, S. (2024) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.93740.2 · Cited by 4
Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Evidence in a Systematic Review
Granikov, V., Hong, Q. N., & Pluye, P. (2021) · Advances in knowledge acquisition, transfer, and management book series/Advances in knowledge acquisition, transfer and management book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-8844-4.ch007 · Cited by 2
Ruco, A., Cernat, A., Calleja, S., Tinmouth, J., & Lofters, A. (2023) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066005 · Cited by 2
de Vos‐Jakobs, S., Boel, F., Bramer, W. M., Bierma‐Zeinstra, S., & Agricola, R. (2023) · Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics B · doi:10.1097/bpb.0000000000001113 · Cited by 2
Self-citationLock, E., Reeves, K., & Vujcich, D. (2024) · Journal of Family Violence · doi:10.1007/s10896-024-00682-3 · Cited by 3
Thijssen, A., Schreuder, R.-M., Dehghani, N., et al. (2024) · Endoscopy International Open · doi:10.1055/a-2403-3103 · Cited by 2
“The process of de-duplication was performed in EndNote according to the method described by Bramer et al. (2016) [8].”
Enzymatic TherapyversusVATS for pleural infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis
de Jonge, W. R., Smits, B., Ket, J. C. F., et al. (2024) · ERJ Open Research · doi:10.1183/23120541.00619-2024 · Cited by 2
“0.1 (Clarivate), following the Amsterdam Efficient Deduplication (AED) method [16] and the Bramer method [17].”
InfluentialGallagher, J., Antunes, B., Sutton, J. P., Kuhn, I. L., Kelly, M. P., Duschinsky, R., & Barclay, S. I. G. (2024) · Palliative Medicine · doi:10.1177/02692163241286110 · Cited by 2
Baradaran, A., Tolentino, R., Grad, R. M., Ganache, I., Gore, G. C., Rahimi, S. A., & Pluye, P. (2024) · International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care · doi:10.1017/s0266462324000370 · Cited by 3
“Results from all databases were gathered in an EndNote library, and duplicates were removed according to a method described by Bramer et al. (18).”
Gjosha, B., Steunenberg, S. L., Faes, M. C., & van der Laan, L. (2024) · Annals of Vascular Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2024.10.025 · Cited by 2
Stocker, R., Wittauer, M., Kvarda, P., et al. (2024) · The Journal of Arthroplasty · doi:10.1016/j.arth.2024.11.057 · Cited by 2
Trends in shoulder arthroplasty research over the decades
Dupley, L., Atwan, Y., & Viswanath, A. I. (2024) · Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma · doi:10.1016/j.jcot.2024.102882 · Cited by 2
Home visiting for postpartum depression
Yu, M., Washburn, M., Bayhi, J. L., Xu, W., Carr, L. C., & Sampson, M. (2025) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd015984 · Cited by 2
Iltis, A. S., Baker, L. L., Baldwin, K. A., Cruz, L., Yaeger, L., & DuBois, J. M. (2025) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-025-21903-4 · Cited by 4
How adult patients with complex trauma experiences (CTE) experience yoga as treatment
Lorentzen, K. E. A., Nordanger, D. Ø., Weimand, B. M., Hammersbøen, Å. M., Telles, S., & Halvorsen, M. S. (2025) · European Journal of Trauma & Dissociation · doi:10.1016/j.ejtd.2025.100529 · Cited by 3
Patel, Y. P., Ghaddar, L., Lin, Y., Karim, N., Chan, K., Dupuis, L. L., & Tadrous, M. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0304540 · Cited by 2
“To eliminate duplicate citations, we will employ the Bramer de-duplication method [17].”
Hudson, T. J., Linette, T. S. H., Phillips, V., et al. (2025) · Otology & Neurotology · doi:10.1097/mao.0000000000004491 · Cited by 2
Social acceptability of innovation: A systematic literature review and future research directions
Jammes, J., Folcher, P., & N’Goala, G. (2025) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124131 · Cited by 3
Haverkamp, E., Olsman, E., Ćurĉić‐Blake, B., Ramírez, V. V., Aleman, A., Ket, J. C. F., & Schaap‐Jonker, H. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1569514 · Cited by 6
“0.1 (Clarivate tm ), following the Amsterdam Efficient Deduplication (AED) method (Otten et al., 2019) and the Bramer method (Bramer et al., 2016).”
InfluentialA Systematic Review on Sustainable 3D Concrete Printing: Opportunities and Challenges.
Wijethunge, A., Samarasinghe, D. A. S., Le, A., et al. (2025) · CIB Conferences · doi:10.7771/3067-4883.1881 · Cited by 2
Degol, L., Olaerts, I., Jacobs, S., et al. (2025) · Journal of Wound Ostomy and Continence Nursing · doi:10.1097/won.0000000000001197 · Cited by 2
Reizner, J., Fischer, S., Linseisen, J., Meisinger, C., & Freuer, D. (2025) · EClinicalMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103410 · Cited by 3
Scoping review of early mobility in the intensive care unit following cardiac surgery
Hyde, E. K., Hay, J. L., Monnin, C., Gregora, A., Smith, K., Shaski, C., Bozek, G., Gilchrist, S., Fagan, A., Ashe, M. C., et al. (2025) · Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.accpm.2025.101603 · Cited by 2
Esquetini-Vernon, C., Polania-Sandoval, C. A., Meschia, J. F., et al. (2025) · Journal of Vascular Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2025.11.003 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Bramer, W. M., Giustini, D., de Jonge, G. B., Holland, L., & Bekhuis, T.
- Affiliations
- Erasmus MC (NL)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- Southern College of Optometry (US)
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Venue
- Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA
- Published
- 2016-07
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 240-243
- ISSN
- 1536-5050 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-9439
- PMC
- PMC4915647
- OpenAlex
- W2471940872
- Cited by
- 2,103
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 346 · 2025: 333 · 2024: 419 · 2023: 340 · 2022: 252 · 2021: 218 · 2020: 113 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 5.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of the Medical Library Association JMLA (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Data Quality and Management
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Keywords
- data deduplication, duplicate records, database search results, systematic reviews, EndNote, information professionals, bibliographic databases
- MeSH terms
- Review Literature as Topic, Databases, Bibliographic, Information Storage and Retrieval
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
