ScholarIQanswers from OpenAlex

Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies

PaperCitations, authors & open-access status

Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies is a paper indexed in ScholarIQ from OpenAlex.

How many citations does Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies have?

ScholarIQcitation count

Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies has 21 citations in the OpenAlex counts ScholarIQ stores.

When was Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies published?

ScholarIQyear

Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies has 2022 year in the ScholarIQ index.

What is the open-access status of Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies?

ScholarIQoa status

Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies has gold oa status in the ScholarIQ index.

What is the DOI of Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies?

ScholarIQdoi

The DOI for Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies is on the source record.

What is the PMID of Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies?

ScholarIQpmid

The PMID for Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies is on the source record.

What is the OpenAlex record for Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies?

ScholarIQopenalex

The OpenAlex for Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science—A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies is on the source record.

Related on ScholarIQ

470M+ articles · 14-day free trial