Abstract
In August 2015, one of us (HHGH) received an unsolicited email from the publishing company Elsevier announcing a citation of her short letter published in 2006.1 The letter had attempted to correct a considerable overestimate of the number of Cochrane reviews on rehabilitation interventions (figure⇓).1 Intrigued, she investigated further and found that, as of August 2015, this modest letter had had 62 citations, all of which related to meta-analyses of genetic risk factors. The first of these meta-analyses was published in 2009 and all the lead authors were based in China. Consistently, authors referenced the letter to support their use of the Cochran Q-statistic for exploring heterogeneity of effect sizes, rather than to highlight the need for Cochrane reviews on rehabilitation.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | - |
Journal | BMJ |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 14 Dec 2015 |