1. Retrouvey, H., et al., Cross-sectional analysis of bibliometrics and altmetrics: comparing the impact of qualitative and quantitative articles in the British Medical Journal. BMJ Open, 2020. 10(10): p. e040950.
2. Brandt, J.S., et al., A Bibliometric Analysis of Top-Cited Journal Articles in Obstetrics and Gynecology. JAMA Network Open, 2019. 2(12): p. e1918007-e1918007.
3. Trueger, N.S., Y. Yilmaz, and T.M. Chan, Leveraging Tweets, Citations, and Social Networks to Improve Bibliometrics. JAMA Network Open, 2020. 3(7): p. e2010911-e2010911.
4. Allareddy, V., et al., Association between study design and citation counts of articles published in the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics and Angle Orthodontist. Orthodontics (Chic.), 2012. 13(1): p. 184-91.
5. Montori, V.M., et al., Systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of location and citation counts. BMC Med, 2003. 1: p. 2.
6. Patsopoulos, N.A., A.A. Analatos, and J.P. Ioannidis, Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. Jama, 2005. 293(19): p. 2362-6.
7. Winnik, S., et al., From abstract to impact in cardiovascular research: factors predicting publication and citation. Eur Heart J, 2012. 33(24): p. 3034-45.
8. Willis, D.L., et al., Predictors of citations in the urological literature. BJU international, 2011. 107(12): p. 1876-1880.
9. Wolf, D.M. and P.A. Williamson, Impact factor and study design: the Academic Value of Published Research (AVaRes) score. The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2009. 91(1): p. 71-73.
10. Ioannidis, J.P.A., The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. The Milbank quarterly, 2016. 94(3): p. 485-514.
11. Mulrow, C.D., The medical review article: state of the science. Ann Intern Med, 1987. 106(3): p. 485-8.
12. Bastian, H., P. Glasziou, and I. Chalmers, Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med, 2010. 7(9): p. e1000326.
13. Page, M.J., et al., Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study. PLoS Med, 2016. 13(5): p. e1002028.
14. Pieper, D., et al., Overviews of reviews often have limited rigor: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol, 2012. 65(12): p. 1267-73.
15. Lunny, C., J.E. McKenzie, and S. McDonald, Retrieval of overviews of systematic reviews in MEDLINE was improved by the development of an objectively derived and validated search strategy. J Clin Epidemiol, 2016. 74: p. 107-18.
16. Goossen, K., et al., Database combinations to retrieve systematic reviews in overviews of reviews: a methodological study. BMC medical research methodology, 2020. 20(1): p. 138-138.
17. Lunny, C., et al., Overviews of reviews incompletely report methods for handling overlapping, discordant, and problematic data. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2020. 118: p. 69-85.
18. Andersen, J., J. Belmont, and C.T. Cho, Journal impact factor in the era of expanding literature. Journal of microbiology, immunology, and infection= Wei mian yu gan ran za zhi, 2006. 39(6): p. 436-443.
19. Hartling, L., et al., A descriptive analysis of overviews of reviews published between 2000 and 2011. PLoS One, 2012. 7(11): p. e49667.
20. Lokker, C., et al., Prediction of citation counts for clinical articles at two years using data available within three weeks of publication: retrospective cohort study. BMJ, 2008. 336(7645): p. 655-657.
21. Tahamtan, I., A.S. Afshar, and K. Ahamdzadeh, Factors affecting number of citations: a comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics, 2016. 107(3): p. 1195-1225.
22. Bhandari, M., et al., Factors associated with citation rates in the orthopedic literature. Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie, 2007. 50(2): p. 119-123.
23. Royle, P., et al., Bibliometrics of systematic reviews: analysis of citation rates and journal impact factors. Systematic Reviews, 2013. 2(1): p. 74.
24. Antman, E.M., et al., A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. Jama, 1992. 268(2): p. 240-8.
25. Kulkarni, A.V., J.W. Busse, and I. Shams, Characteristics associated with citation rate of the medical literature. PLoS One, 2007. 2(5): p. e403.
26. Davis, P.M., et al., Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial. BMJ, 2008. 337: p. a568.
27. Callaham, M., R.L. Wears, and E. Weber, Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals. Jama, 2002. 287(21): p. 2847-50.