SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
The future of reviews
10 references·0 citing·42 second hop
The future of reviews (2025)The future of reviewsMachines like us scientists? (2025)Machines like us scientists?Human versus artificial intelligence: evaluating ChatGPT’s performance in conducting published systematic reviews with meta-analysis in chronic pain research (2025)Human versus artificial intel…Can AI review the scientific literature — and figure out what it all means? (2024)Can AI review the scientific …Audit AI search tools now, before they skew research (2023)Audit AI search tools now, be…Using artificial intelligence methods for systematic review in health sciences: A systematic review (2022)Using artificial intelligence…Scientific Publishing in Biomedicine: A Brief History of Scientific Journals (2022)Scientific Publishing in Biom…Review Research as Scientific Inquiry (2022)Review Research as Scientific…Creative Destruction: The Structural Consequences of Scientific Curation (2021)Creative Destruction: The Str…The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)The Mass Production of Redund…Citation Metrics: A Primer on How (Not) to Normalize (2016)Citation Metrics: A Primer on…The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge (2007)Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact (2008)Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics (2015)A Decade of Empirical Research on Research Integrity: What Have We (Not) Looked At? (2019)Studying review articles in scientometrics and beyond: a research agenda (2020)A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior (2021)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation (2015)Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis (2018)Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews? (2018)What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences (2018)Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. (1943)Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society (1988)Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 (1989)Artificial Intelligence in Neurosurgery: A Bibliometric Analysis (2022)Scoping reviews: Their development and application in environmental and sustainability education research (2022)What Types of Novelty Are Most Disruptive? (2023)Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews (2016)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)School Closures During Social Lockdown and Mental Health, Health Behaviors, and Well-being Among Children and Adolescents During the First COVID-19 Wave (2022)Data extraction for evidence synthesis using a large language model: A proof‐of‐concept study (2024)How to optimize the systematic review process using AI tools (2024)Naturalistic inquiry (1985)Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence‐Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review (2003)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2019)Digital entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education: a review of the literature (2023)Time as a Research Lens: A Conceptual Review and Research Agenda (2023)The burgeoning role of literature review articles in management research: an introduction and outlook (2024)Little Science, Big Science (1963)Publication bias in clinical research (1991)Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research (2014)Integrity at stake: confronting “publish or perish” in the developing world and emerging economies (2024)Analysis of the time and workers needed to conduct systematic reviews of medical interventions using data from the PROSPERO registry (2017)A full systematic review was completed in 2 weeks using automation tools: a case study (2020)AI tools for systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses in educational psychology: An overview and a practical guide (2025)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Automated Paper Screening for Clinical Reviews Using Large Language Models: Data Analysis Study (2023)Harnessing the Power of ChatGPT for Automating Systematic Review Process: Methodology, Case Study, Limitations, and Future Directions (2023)Role of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Assisting Systematic Review Process in Health Research: A Systematic Review (2025)Reproducibility in Science (2014)Gone Fishin’: Addressing Completeness, Accuracy, and Representativeness in the Search and Coding Processes of Meta-Analyses in the Organizational Sciences (2023)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2016The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses1,481 cited
  • 2022Review Research as Scientific Inquiry245 cited
  • 2022Using artificial intelligence methods for systematic review in health sciences: A systematic review222 cited
  • 2016Citation Metrics: A Primer on How (Not) to Normalize89 cited
  • 2021Creative Destruction: The Structural Consequences of Scientific Curation66 cited
  • 2022Scientific Publishing in Biomedicine: A Brief History of Scientific Journals52 cited
  • 2025Human versus artificial intelligence: evaluating ChatGPT’s performance in conducting published systematic reviews with meta-analysis in chronic pain research26 cited
  • 2024Can AI review the scientific literature — and figure out what it all means?17 cited
  • 2023Audit AI search tools now, before they skew research17 cited
  • 2025Machines like us scientists?2 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work