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 801–900 of 1,918
Nijsink, H., Overduin, C. G., Willems, L. H., Warlé, M. C., & Fütterer, J. J. (2022) · Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · doi:10.1002/jmri.28205 · Cited by 11
Childhood Cancer Survivorship Globally
Martos, M., George, N. B., Arreguín-González, F. E., Baassiri, M., Benito-Reséndiz, A. E., Bhakta, N. H., Bhatt, N. S., Bradford, N., Ehrhardt, M. J., Fajardo, D. G., et al. (2025) · JAMA Oncology · doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2025.2506 · Cited by 11
Pawa, S., Kwon, R. S., Fishman, D. S., et al. (2023) · Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · doi:10.1016/j.gie.2023.05.055 · Cited by 10
van Baar, P. M., de Weg, J. M. B., ten Hove, E. A., Schoonmade, L. J., van de Mheen, L., Pajkrt, E., de Groot, C. J. M., & de Boer, M. A. (2023) · Hypertension in Pregnancy · doi:10.1080/10641955.2023.2225597 · Cited by 11
Sterlingova, T., Nylander, E. M., Almqvist, L., et al. (2023) · Radiography · doi:10.1016/j.radi.2023.06.010 · Cited by 10
Comorbidities of community-dwelling older adults with urinary incontinence: A scoping review
Scharp, D., Harkins, S., & Topaz, M. (2023) · Geriatric Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2023.08.005 · Cited by 10
Health literacy interventions for informal caregivers: systematic review
Yuen, E. Y. N., Wilson, C. J., Adams, J., Kangutkar, T., Livingston, P. M., WHITE, V. M., Ockerby, C. M., & Hutchinson, A. M. (2024) · BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care · doi:10.1136/spcare-2023-004513 · Cited by 11
Bresolin, P., Steindal, S. A., Bingen, H. M., Zlámal, J., Martini, J. G., Petersen, E. K., & Nes, A. A. G. (2024) · JMIR Nursing · doi:10.2196/54443 · Cited by 13
“The research librarian exported the identified citations to EndNote (Clarivate) to remove duplicates [27].”
MethodThe experience of women researchers during the Covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review
Inguaggiato, G., Pallise Perello, C., Verdonk, P., Schoonmade, L., Andanda, P., van den Hoven, M., & Evans, N. (2024) · Research Ethics · doi:10.1177/17470161241231268 · Cited by 9
“4 (Clarivate TM), following the Amsterdam Efficient Deduplication (AED) method (Otten et al., 2019) and the Bramer-method (Bramer et al., 2016).”
Adolescents’ voices on self-engagement in mental health treatment: a scoping review
Svamo, N. T. Ø., Haug, S. H. K., DeMarinis, V., & Hertzberg, U. (2024) · European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1007/s00787-024-02425-7 · Cited by 10
“HCPs should build trust, with mutual understanding, to prevent method [26], and duplicates were removed ( n = 356).”
Gosiker, B. J., Moutchia, J., Nguyen, N., Getahun, D., & Goodman, M. G. (2024) · Journal of Clinical & Translational Endocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.jcte.2024.100349 · Cited by 13
“The list of references from the search was uploaded into Endnote and duplicate references were removed using the protocol outlined by Bramer et al.[15] In an effort to include the most recent publications, we applied the same strategy and search terms and updated the review using Ovid MEDLINE to…”
Pryor, N., Wang, J., Young, J., et al. (2024) · Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology · doi:10.1017/ice.2024.73 · Cited by 10
“Citations were deduplicated by librarian WT using a modified version of the Bramer Endnote Deduplication Technique 14 .”
MethodChua, H. M., Moshawih, S., Kifli, N., Goh, H. P., & Ming, L. C. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0301396 · Cited by 11
“0 where duplicate publications were removed by following the steps as described by Bramer et al. [48].”
MethodKokorelias, K. M., Chiu, M., Paul, S., Zhu, L., Choudhury, N., Craven, C. G., Dubrowski, A., Redublo, T., Kapralos, B., Smith, M. S. D., et al. (2024) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.64082 · Cited by 11
A Scoping Review of Stigma Related to Prostate Cancer in Black Men
Bamidele, O. O., Greenley, S. L., Ukoha-Kalu, B. O., Titus, O. F., & Nanton, V. (2024) · Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities · doi:10.1007/s40615-024-02070-5 · Cited by 14
“Search results were downloaded into Endnote bibliographic software and deduplication was undertaken using a systematic method [31].”
Dam, E. B.-V., Shepherd, L., van de Schoot, R., Engelhard, I. M., & Loey, N. E. E. V. (2024) · Health Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/17437199.2024.2423725 · Cited by 10
“All records retrieved from the databases were updated and de-duplicated in EndNote (2013) using the automatic deduplications steps described by Bramer et al. (2016), followed by a de-duplication based on DOI.”
Alogaiel, D. M., Alsuwaylihi, A., Alotaibi, M. S., Macdonald, I. A., & Lobo, D. N. (2025) · Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2025.01.005 · Cited by 12
Lisik, D., Ermiş, S. S. Ö., Milani, G. P., Spolidoro, G. C. I., Ercan, S., Salisu, M., Odetola, F. O., Ghiglioni, D. G., Pylov, D., Goksör, E., et al. (2025) · European Respiratory Review · doi:10.1183/16000617.0160-2024 · Cited by 13
Bisschop, J. M., de Jonge, H. J. M., Brunsveld‐Reinders, A. H., van de Mheen, D., Mathijssen, J. J. P., & Rozema, A. D. (2025) · Drug and Alcohol Review · doi:10.1111/dar.13987 · Cited by 10
“After removing duplicates using the duplication guideline [26], 6521 articles remained.”
Body composition alterations in patients with lung cancer
Snoke, D. B., Atwood, G., Bellefleur, E. R., Stokes, A. M., & Toth, M. J. (2025) · American Journal of Physiology-Cell Physiology · doi:10.1152/ajpcell.01048.2024 · Cited by 10
Adjuvant endocrine treatment strategies for non-metastatic breast cancer: a network meta-analysis
Papakonstantinou, A., Villacampa, G. J., Navarro, V., Oliveira, M., Valachis, A., Pascual, T., & Matikas, A. (2025) · EClinicalMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103116 · Cited by 12
“De-duplication was done using the method described by Bramer et al. 16 One fi nal, extra step was added to compare digital object identi fi ers (DOIs).”
Anjie, S. I., Gecse, K. B., Meloni, C. M., et al. (2025) · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2025.03.021 · Cited by 10
Sylvester, A. L., Hensenne, E., Ivanov, D., Poser, B. A., Linden, D. E. J., van Amelsvoort, T., & Vingerhoets, C. (2025) · Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders · doi:10.1186/s11689-025-09614-8 · Cited by 12
“Retrieved articles were deduplicated in EndNote 20 [47].”
Ng, J. J., Tan, J. K. H., Lee, J. W. K., et al. (2020) · ANZ Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1111/ans.16448 · Cited by 10
Bernhard, S., Adam, L., Atef, H., Häberli, D., Bramer, W. M., Minder, B., Döring, Y., Laine, J. E., Muka, T., Rössler, J. K., et al. (2021) · Journal of Vascular Surgery Venous and Lymphatic Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jvsv.2021.07.008 · Cited by 10
Self-citationPharmacist‐prescribed hormonal contraception services: A systematic review of implementation studies
Newlon, J. L., Reed, J. B., Stone, R. H., Satterfield, K., & Meredith, A. H. (2021) · JACCP JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY · doi:10.1002/jac5.1539 · Cited by 9
“com/) using the process created by Bramer et al, leaving 1318 unique records to be screened.(48) After the title and abstract screening, 184 full text articles were reviewed and 21 were included in the final review.”
MethodLabban, W., Stadnyk, M., Sommerfeldt, M. F., et al. (2021) · Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics · doi:10.1186/s40634-021-00397-0 · Cited by 10
Rogers, A. A., Willumsen, T., Strømme, H., & Johnsen, J.-A. K. (2022) · Clinical and Experimental Dental Research · doi:10.1002/cre2.548 · Cited by 10
Abdeen, A. H., Trist, B. G., & Double, K. L. (2022) · npj Parkinson s Disease · doi:10.1038/s41531-022-00345-4 · Cited by 10
Hodge, D., Hodel, E. M., Hughes, E., et al. (2023) · JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes · doi:10.1097/qai.0000000000003122 · Cited by 10
Screening and Treatment for Co-occurring Gambling and Substance Use: A Scoping Review
Yarbakhsh, E., van der Sterren, A., & Bowles, D. C. (2023) · Journal of Gambling Studies · doi:10.1007/s10899-023-10240-z · Cited by 14
“Results were exported into EndNote and duplicates were removed using the protocol developed by Bramer et al. (2016).”
MethodPsychiatric and neurological manifestations in adults with Smith–Magenis syndrome: A scoping review
Korteling, D., Musch, J. L. I., Zinkstok, J., & Boot, E. (2023) · American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B Neuropsychiatric Genetics · doi:10.1002/ajmg.b.32956 · Cited by 11
“All records identified by the searches were imported into Endnote to remove any duplicates (Bramer et al., 2016).”
MethodVascular-related biomarkers in psychosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Li, X., Hu, S., & Liu, P. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1241422 · Cited by 10
“Deduplication was performed using the Bramer method (20).”
MethodZoonoses research in Somalia: A scoping review using a One Health approach
Mumin, F. I., Fenton, A., Osman, A. Y., et al. (2023) · One Health · doi:10.1016/j.onehlt.2023.100626 · Cited by 10
“3.3; Clavariate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA) for deduplication as previously described [20].”
MethodInfluentialSingh‐Franco, D., Mastropietro, D. R., Metzner, M., Dressler, M. D., Fares, A., Johnson, M., Rosa, D. D. L., & Wolowich, W. R. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0243134 · Cited by 11
“Duplicates (7,301) were identified and removed using the de-duplication method from Bramer et al. [57] for a total of 13,447 unique citations.”
Coumoundouros, C., von Essén, L., Sanderman, R., & Woodford, J. (2020) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035406 · Cited by 10
Boderie, N. W., Mölenberg, F. J. M., Sheikh, A., Bramer, W. M., Alex Burdorf, A., van Lenthe, F. J., & Been, J. V. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040167 · Cited by 10
Self-citationMcShane, E., Hanna, L., Zoanetti, C., Murnane, L. C., Baguley, B. J., & Furness, K. (2025) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu17162691 · Cited by 11
“The systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines [29], utilising widely recognised software tools such as EndNote and Covidence [31,33].”
Dramba, T., Popa, A. E., Poroch, M., Bacoanu, G., Esanu, I. M., Popa, E., & Poroch, V. (2025) · Diseases · doi:10.3390/diseases13120389 · Cited by 10
Botulinum Toxin Type A for the Prevention of Migraines: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews
Chamani, G., Jasim, H., Minston, A., et al. (2026) · Toxins · doi:10.3390/toxins18010033 · Cited by 9
“Duplicates were removed following Bramer et al.’s method [52], with an additional DOI check for accuracy.”
Pothuri, V. S., Anzelmo, M. A., Gallaher, E., Ogunlana, Y., Aliabadi‐Wahle, S., Tan, B. R., Crippin, J. S., & Hammill, C. W. (2023) · Endocrine Practice · doi:10.1016/j.eprac.2023.05.011 · Cited by 10
Carrington, L., Hale, L. A., Freeman, C., Smith, D. E., & Perry, M. (2023) · Disability and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09638288.2023.2259305 · Cited by 10
“References were stored and systematically de-duplicated within EndNote [34] leading to 3870 articles being imported into Veritas Health Innovation Covidence systematic review software for screening and data extraction.”
Interventions to Improve Patient Care on Surgical Ward Rounds: A Systematic Review
He, R., Bhat, S., Varghese, C., et al. (2023) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-023-07221-z · Cited by 9
“Two investigators (RH, SB) used the Rayyan web application to independently screen titles and abstracts, with relevant full texts then considered for final inclusion [18, 19].”
MethodHedlund, J., Blomberg, K., Hjelmqvist, H., et al. (2023) · Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.jopan.2023.07.023 · Cited by 9
Pickwell‐Smith, B., Greenley, S. L., Lind, M., & Macleod, U. (2023) · Journal of Cancer Policy · doi:10.1016/j.jcpo.2023.100458 · Cited by 9
Naso-Orbital-Ethmoid Fracture Repair Techniques: A Systematic Review
Leader, P., & Gal, T. J. (2023) · Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.joms.2023.12.015 · Cited by 9
Akhoundzadeh, D., Bloemers, F. W., Verhofstad, M. H. J., et al. (2024) · European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00068-024-02478-y · Cited by 9
“01 (Clarivate tm ), following the Amsterdam Efficient Deduplication (AED) method [31] and the Bramer method [32].”
MethodPatty, N. J. S., van Meeteren, K., Willemen, A. M., Mol, M. A. E., Verdonk, M., Ketelaar, M., & Schuengel, C. (2024) · Journal of Child and Family Studies · doi:10.1007/s10826-024-02825-y · Cited by 15
“All records retrieved from the academic databases were imported into EndnoteX9, and duplicates were removed (Bramer et al., 2016).”
Brassil, M., O’Mahony, C., & Greene, C. M. (2024) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-024-02512-5 · Cited by 14
“All records were uploaded to Endnote (2013), where duplicates were removed using instructions from Bramer et al. (2016).”
Risk prediction algorithms for prolonged postoperative ileus: A systematic review
Liu, G. X. H., Milne, T. G. E., Xu, W., Varghese, C., Keane, C., O’Grady, G., Bissett, I. P., & Wells, C. I. (2024) · Colorectal Disease · doi:10.1111/codi.17010 · Cited by 12
“De-duplication was conducted using the methods of Bramer et al [ 21].”
MethodThe Physical Demands of Wheelchair Tennis Match Play: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis
Williamson, S., Ardern, C. L., Berry, C., Heron, N., van Rensburg, D. C. J., Jansen, M. G. T., McCormick, S., Reid, M. M., Sánchez-Pay, A., Saueressig, T., et al. (2024) · Sports Medicine · doi:10.1007/s40279-024-02028-x · Cited by 9
“5 (Clarivate), following the Amsterdam Efficient Deduplication (AED) method [23] and the Bramer method [24].”
Veni, Vidi, Vici—When Is Home Video Seizure Monitoring Helpful?
Sheehan, T., Winter-Potter, E., Dorste, A., et al. (2024) · Epiliepsy currents/Epilepsy currents · doi:10.1177/15357597241253426 · Cited by 9
“After importing all abstracts and citations into EndNote, we deduplicated them using the method by Bramer et al. 6 This set was then imported into Covidence systematic review software ™ .”
Dehkord, E. S., Carvalho, B. D., Ernst, M., et al. (2024) · Materials Today Bio · doi:10.1016/j.mtbio.2024.101100 · Cited by 9
“After eliminating the duplicates [32] and non-relevant ones, they were exported to an online webtool (Rayyan QCRI) to perform the screening.”
MethodGulbransen, K., Thiessen, K. R., Ford, N., Phillips-Beck, W., Watson, H., & Gregory, P. (2024) · International Journal of Integrated Care · doi:10.5334/ijic.7589 · Cited by 8
“Citations were saved and deduplicated in EndNote, using the Bramer method [31].”
MethodLokhorst, C., van der Werf, S., Berger, R. M. F., & Douwes, J. M. (2024) · Journal of the American Heart Association · doi:10.1161/jaha.123.034151 · Cited by 11
“15 The remaining studies were exported to Rayyan 16 for the title-abstract screening.”
BackgroundU.S. postsecondary students' health and academic outcomes: A comprehensive scoping review
Lederer, A. M., Oswalt, S. B., Parise, I. M., Rosenthal, M. N., & Horlick, R. (2024) · Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2024.108059 · Cited by 9
James‐Brabham, E., von Bastian, C. C., Brough, C., et al. (2024) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/cdev.14162 · Cited by 9
Zellenrath, P. A., van Tilburg, L., Pouw, R. E., Yadlapati, R. H., Peters, Y., Ujiki, M. B., Thota, P. N., Ishimura, N., Meltzer, S. J., Peleg, N., et al. (2024) · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2024.06.053 · Cited by 10
King, S. W., Abouharb, A., Doggett, T., Taufiqurrakhman, M., Palan, J., Freear, B., Pandit, H. G., & van Duren, B. H. (2024) · Bioengineering · doi:10.3390/bioengineering11101049 · Cited by 10
“De-duplication of the results was performed using a strategy described by Bramer et al. [21].”
MethodImpact of supply chain disruptions and drug shortages on drug utilization: A scoping review protocol
Santhireswaran, A., Ho, M. K. H., Fuller, K., et al. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0313298 · Cited by 9
“The Bramer method of de-duplication will be used to remove all duplicate citations [23].”
MethodViolence Against Women and Girls in Zimbabwe: A Review of a Decade of the Empirical Literature
Bengesai, A. V., & Chikhungu, L. (2024) · Trauma Violence & Abuse · doi:10.1177/15248380241291074 · Cited by 9
“…(a) identifying the research question, (b) developing the inclusion criteria, (c) searching databases, (d) importing all results to an endnote library to delete duplicates, (e) extracting data in Excel, and (f) synthesizing and reporting the results (Bramer et al., 2016; Page et al., 2021).”
Lazzarini, S. G., Mosconi, B., Cordani, C., et al. (2024) · Journal of Neurology · doi:10.1007/s00415-024-12798-z · Cited by 9
“Duplicates were removed using EndNote (version 20.4.1) as described by Bramer et al. [26].”
InfluentialAssessing the effectiveness of suprascapular nerve block in the treatment of frozen shoulder
Bennett, J., Patel, N., Nanthakumar, N., Phillips, V., Nayar, S. K., & Kang, N. (2024) · The Bone & Joint Journal · doi:10.1302/0301-620x.107b1.bjj-2024-0644.r1 · Cited by 9
Albrecht, F., Kvist, A. J., & Franzén, E. (2025) · NeuroImage Clinical · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2025.103733 · Cited by 10
Social inclusion programming for older adults living in age-friendly cities: a scoping review
Liougas, M. P., Fortino, A., Brozowski, K., & McMurray, J. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-088439 · Cited by 10
“34”
Varga, N., Gulyás, L., Meznerics, F., Barkovskij-Jakobsen, K. S., Szabó, B., Hegyi, P., Bánvölgyi, A., Medvecz, M., & Kiss, N. (2025) · International Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/ijd.17828 · Cited by 10
“After removing duplicates using reference management software EndNote 20 (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA, USA) [12], two review authors (N.N.V. and L.G.) independently screened titles, abstracts, and then full texts against predefined eligibility criteria to perform the selection.”
da Cunha, N. M., Tzirita, S., Gobbo, E., & van Wees, S. H. (2025) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2025.1563677 · Cited by 9
Oesterle, T., Bormann, N. L., Al‐Soleiti, M., Kung, S., Singh, B., McGinnis, M. T., da Costa, S. C., Rummans, T. A., Chauhan, M., Cabrera, J. M. R., et al. (2025) · Brain Sciences · doi:10.3390/brainsci15070723 · Cited by 10
Cadel, L., Cimino, S. R., Bradley-Ridout, G., Hitzig, S. L., Packer, T. L., McCarthy, L. M., Patel, T., Lofters, A., Hahn‐Goldberg, S., Ho, C., et al. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0284199 · Cited by 9
“Articles from the electronic database searches were deduplicated using EndNote X8 [24].”
MethodClinical Work-Integrating Care in Current Practice: A Scoping Review
Kluit, L., van Bennekom, C. A. M., Beumer, A., Sluman, M. A., de Boer, A. G. E. M., & de Wind, A. (2023) · Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation · doi:10.1007/s10926-023-10143-1 · Cited by 9
“The search results were imported in EndNote to de-duplicate the dataset [30, 31].”
MethodHaraldsson, P., Nylander, E. M., Jonker, D., Ros, A., & Josefsson, K. A. (2024) · Work · doi:10.3233/wor-230205 · Cited by 11
“Records found during the search phase were exported to a reference management software (End-Note) to enable the identification and removal of duplicates [22].”
MethodPsychologically based interventions for adults with chronic neuropathic pain: a scoping review
Oguchi, M., Nicholas, M. K., Asghari, A., Sanders, D., & Wrigley, P. J. (2024) · Pain Medicine · doi:10.1093/pm/pnae006 · Cited by 9
“39 The attrition rate in each study was also examined.”
He, K., Pang, K., Ying, L., et al. (2024) · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1111/apt.18093 · Cited by 9
Vallabhajosyula, S., Ogunsakin, A., Jentzer, J. C., Sinha, S. S., Kochar, A., Gerberi, D., Mullin, C. J., Ahn, S. H., Sodha, N. R., Ventetuolo, C. E., et al. (2024) · Journal of Cardiac Failure · doi:10.1016/j.cardfail.2024.06.020 · Cited by 9
Berube, M., Moore, L., Lauzier, F., Côté, C. L., Vogt, K., Tremblay, L. N., Martel, M.-O., Pagé, M. G., Tardif, P., Pinard, A.-M., et al. (2020) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035268 · Cited by 9
Influenza A virus vaccine research conducted in swine from 1990 to May 2018: A scoping review
Keay, S., Poljak, Z., Klapwyk, M., O'Connor, A. M. C., Friendship, R. M., O’Sullivan, T. L., & Sargeant, J. M. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0236062 · Cited by 9
Vaccaro, C., Shakeri, A., Czaplinski, E., & Eltonsy, S. (2020) · Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.15586/jptcp.v27i4.722 · Cited by 9
Effectiveness of trauma centre verification: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Batomen, B., Moore, L., Carabalí, M., Tardif, P., Champion, H. R., & Nandi, A. (2021) · Canadian Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1503/cjs.016219 · Cited by 9
Feasibility of mHealth interventions for depressive symptoms in Latin America: a systematic review
Escobar-Viera, C. G., Cernuzzi, L., Miller, R. S., Rodríguez-Marín, H. J., Vieta, E., Toñánez, M. G., Marsch, L. A., & Hidalgo‐Mazzei, D. (2021) · International Review of Psychiatry · doi:10.1080/09540261.2021.1887822 · Cited by 12
“After importing them into a bibliography managing software (Bramer et al., 2016), duplicate references were removed.”
MethodRosettenstein, K. R., Lain, S. J., Wormleaton, N., & Jack, M. (2021) · Clinical Endocrinology · doi:10.1111/cen.14562 · Cited by 9
Kazarian, G. S., Steinhaus, M. E., & Kim, H. J. (2021) · Global Spine Journal · doi:10.1177/21925682211026630 · Cited by 9
“Following the development of a reference library, results were imported into EndNote X7 (Thomas Reuters, 2015) and duplicates were removed as previously described by Bramer et al.54 Following de-duplication, articles were screened by title and abstract in order to identify studies pertaining to the current review.”
MethodDauletbaev, N., Kühn, S., Holtz, S., Waldmann, S., Niekrenz, L., Müller, B. S., Bellinghausen, C., Dreher, M., Rohde, G. G. U., & Vogelmeier, C. F. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053819 · Cited by 12
Bjørnerås, A. B., Witsø, A. E., Kvam, L., Eide, A. H., Jahren, L., & Horghagen, S. (2022) · International Journal of Disability Development and Education · doi:10.1080/1034912x.2022.2095558 · Cited by 10
“Guided by the method of Bramer, Giustini, de Jonge, Holland, and Bekhuis (2016), p. 3335 duplicates were removed, resulting in 4175 unique references.”
MethodAxelsson, E., & Hedman‐Lagerlöf, E. (2023) · Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research · doi:10.1080/14737167.2023.2250915 · Cited by 9
“We de-duplicated search hits, last in Endnote X9 [32], and then proceeded to independently assess all remaining search hits in parallel.”
BackgroundCoadaptation Between Smart Technologies and Older Adults Over Time: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Kokorelias, K. M., Grigorovich, A., Harris, M. T., Rehman, U., Ritchie, L., Levy, A., Denecke, K., & McMurray, J. (2023) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/51129 · Cited by 8
“The search results will be combined in EndNote reference management software and duplicates will be removed [67].”
Teacher-Student Relationships and Student Outcomes: A Systematic Second-Order Meta-Analytic ReviewPreprint
Emslander, V., Holzberger, D., Ofstad, S. B., et al. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/qxntb · Cited by 9
Sacks, E., Brizuela, V., Javadi, D., Kim, Y., Elmi, N., Finlayson, K. W., Crossland, N., Langlois, É. V., Ziegler, D., Parmar, S. M., et al. (2024) · BMJ Global Health · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014075 · Cited by 10
“23 The original search strategy is published elsewhere.”
BackgroundSteinberg, R. J., Posa, S., Pattni, N., Wasilewski, M. B., Robinson, L. R., Jankey, S., Simpson, R., Mayo, A. L., MacKay, C., Dilkas, S., et al. (2023) · Rehabilitation Psychology · doi:10.1037/rep0000491 · Cited by 11
Carrier, F. M., Girard, M., Zuo, R. M., Ziegler, D., Trottier, H., & Chassé, M. (2023) · Transplantation · doi:10.1097/tp.0000000000004744 · Cited by 8
Kokorelias, K. M., Grosse, A., Zhabokritsky, A., Walmsley, S. L., & Sirisegaram, L. (2023) · HIV Medicine · doi:10.1111/hiv.13549 · Cited by 9
“Articles were deduplicated using the Bramer method [29, 30].”
MethodBailey, B. C., Tabone, J. K., Smith, B. N., Monnin, J., Hixon, B., Williams, K., & Rishel, C. W. (2023) · Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma · doi:10.1007/s40653-023-00575-5 · Cited by 17
“All records were imported into an EndNote Library (Team, 2013), where deduplication was performed using the Bramer et al. method (Bramer et al., 2016).”
Gill, K. D., Gill, K. D., Hutcherson, T. C., et al. (2023) · American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education · doi:10.1016/j.ajpe.2023.100626 · Cited by 8
Fieldhouse, J. L. P., van Paassen, D. N., van Engelen, M.-P. E., De Boer, S. C. M., Hartog, W. L., Braak, S., Schoonmade, L. J., Schouws, S. N. T. M., Krudop, W. A., Oudega, M. L., et al. (2024) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2024.1382593 · Cited by 8
Corôa, R. D. C., Charif, A. B., Robitaille, V., Mochcovitch, D. G. V., Samri, M. A., Akpo, T. G., Gogovor, A., Blanchette, V., Souza, L. G., Kastner, K., et al. (2024) · Health Expectations · doi:10.1111/hex.14086 · Cited by 10
“Records retrieved were stored in an EndNote X9 library for reference management and duplicate removal 51 and then exported to the Internet ‐ based system Covidence 52 for the selection process.”
MethodHout, L. I., van Hees, S., Vossen, E., Oomens, S. P. C. J., van de Mheen, D., & Blonk, R. W. B. (2024) · Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation · doi:10.1007/s10926-024-10224-9 · Cited by 10
“We used the six steps formulated by Bramer et al. [19] to perform the de-duplication.”
Determinants of compliance with infection prevention measures by physicians: a scoping review
Schutte, M., van Mansfeld, R., de Vries, R., & Dekker, M. (2024) · Journal of Hospital Infection · doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2024.08.011 · Cited by 10
Bineid, M. M., Ventura, E. F., Samidoust, A., Radha, V., Anjana, R. M., Sudha, V., Walton, G., Mohan, V., & Vimaleswaran, K. S. (2024) · Nutrition Reviews · doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuae115 · Cited by 11
The known and unknown reality of knee dislocations: A systematic review
Randall, Z. D., Strok, M. J., Mazzola, J. W., et al. (2024) · Injury · doi:10.1016/j.injury.2024.111904 · Cited by 8
“…were deleted after using the de-duplication processes described in “ De-du-plication of database search results for systematic reviews in EndNote, ” [7] and an additional 3 duplicates were removed using Covidence.org resulting in a total of 2320 unique citations included in the project library.”
Neijman, M., van der Mierden, S., Karakullukçu, B., Hilgers, F. J. M., van den Brekel, M. W. M., & van der Molen, L. (2024) · American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · doi:10.1044/2024_ajslp-24-00020 · Cited by 8
Mixed Methods Studies Using Secondary Analysis in Nursing and Midwifery: A Methodological Review
Fàbregues, S., Younas, A., Inayat, S., Escalante-Barrios, E., & Durante, Á. (2024) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.16557 · Cited by 7
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
