Citationchaser: A tool for transparent and efficient forward and backward citation chasing in systematic searching

Haddaway, Neal R.; Grainger, Matthew; Gray, Charles T.

doi:10.1002/jrsm.1563

Cited by 230 publications

(145 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

144

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We identified 95 studies as relevant to our meta‐analysis after this initial screening. We then searched backward and forward citations of these selected papers on March 5th, 2021, using the application citationchaser (Haddaway et al, 2021), which uses the Lens database. Because we conducted this additional search to gather recently published studies, we only considered citations from 2018, providing 430 other published studies to screen (not counting duplicates).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The better, the choosier: A meta‐analysis on interindividual variation of male mate choice

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Male mate choice occurs in several animal species, but we know little about the factors that influence the expression of this behaviour. Males vary in their capacity to acquire mates (i.e. male quality), which could be crucial to male mate choice expression but it is often overlooked. Using a meta-analytical approach, we explore interindividual variation in the expression of male mate choice by comparing the mating investment of males of different qualities and phenotypes to high-and low-quality females. We used two datasets that together contained information from 60 empirical studies, comprising 52 species. We found that males of all qualities and phenotypes prefer high-quality females, but differ in the strength of such preference. High-and medium-quality males are choosier than low-quality males.Similarly, males that are larger or in greater body condition are choosier than their counterparts. In contrast, male body mass and age are not associated with changes in male mate choice. We also show that experimental design may influence our understanding of male mating investment patterns, which may limit the generalisation of our findings. Nonetheless, we argue that male quality may be an important feature in the expression of male mate choice.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The better, the choosier: A meta‐analysis on interindividual variation of male mate choice

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For each included article that meets the eligibility criteria, we will conduct backward and forward citation chaining in The Lens via Citation Chaser. (20)…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Association of Marital/Partner Status with Patient-Reported Health Outcomes Following Acute Myocardial Infarction or Stroke: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Zhu

Tran

Leifheit

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionMarital/Partner support is associated with lower mortality and morbidity following acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and stroke. Despite an increasing focus on the effect of patient-centered factors on health outcomes, little is known about the impact of marital/partner status on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).ObjectiveTo synthesize evidence of the association between marital/partner status and PROMs after AMI and stroke and to determine whether associations differ by sex.Methods and analysisWe will search MEDLINE (via Ovid), Web of Science Core Collection (as licensed by Yale University), Scopus, EMBASE (via Ovid), and PsycINFO (via Ovid) from inception to January 10, 2022. Two authors will independently screen titles, abstracts, and then full texts as appropriate, extract data, and assess risk of bias. Conflicts will be resolved by discussion with a third reviewer. The primary outcomes will be the associations between marital/partner status and PROMs. Meta-analysis will be conducted if appropriate. Subgroup analysis by sex and meta-regression with a covariate for the proportion of male participants will be performed to explore differences by sex.Ethics and disseminationThis research is exempt from ethics approval because the study will be conducted using published data. We will disseminate the results of the analysis in a related peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42022295975

show abstract

“…We will screen references from all included guidance. We will use citationchaser 35 (https://www.eshackathon. org/software/citationchaser.html) to import all references into our Covidence database (https://www.covidence.org) for deduplication against other sources and for screening according to the same inclusion criteria as described previously for this scoping review.…”

Section: Reference List Screeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidance relevant to the reporting of health equity in observational research: a scoping review protocol

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionHealth inequities are defined as unfair and avoidable differences in health between groups within a population. Most health research is conducted through observational studies, which are able to offer real-world insights about etiology, healthcare policy/programme effectiveness and the impacts of socioeconomic factors. However, most published reports of observational studies do not address how their findings relate to health equity. Our team seeks to develop equity-relevant reporting guidance as an extension of the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. This scoping review will inform the development of candidate items for the STROBE-Equity extension. We will operationalise equity-seeking populations using the PROGRESS-Plus framework of sociodemographic factors. As part of a parallel stream of the STROBE-Equity project, the relevance of candidate guideline items to Indigenous research will be led by Indigenous coinvestigators on the team.Methods and analysisWe will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute method for conducting scoping reviews. We will evaluate the extent to which the identified guidance supports or refutes our preliminary candidate items for reporting equity in observational studies. These candidate items were developed based on items from equity-reporting guidelines for randomised trials and systematic reviews, developed by members of this team. We will consult with our knowledge users, patients/public partners and Indigenous research steering committee to invite suggestions for relevant guidance documents and interpretation of findings. If the identified guidance suggests the need for additional candidate items, they will be developed through inductive thematic analysis.Ethics and disseminationWe will follow a principled approach that promotes ethical codevelopment with our community partners, based on principles of cultural safety, authentic partnerships, addressing colonial structures in knowledge production and the shared ownership, interpretation, and dissemination of research. All products of this research will be published as open access.

show abstract

Citationchaser: A tool for transparent and efficient forward and backward citation chasing in systematic searching

Cited by 230 publications

References 35 publications

The better, the choosier: A meta‐analysis on interindividual variation of male mate choice

The better, the choosier: A meta‐analysis on interindividual variation of male mate choice

The Association of Marital/Partner Status with Patient-Reported Health Outcomes Following Acute Myocardial Infarction or Stroke: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Guidance relevant to the reporting of health equity in observational research: a scoping review protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About