Research Synthesis Methods最新文献_第2页

Minimum distance estimation of mean and standard deviation from reported quantiles. 报告分位数的均值和标准差的最小距离估计。

IF 8 2区生物学

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-04-15 DOI: 10.1017/rsm.2026.10090

Xiaoyu Tang, Tiejun Tong, Xin Zhang, Haitao Chu

{"title":"Minimum distance estimation of mean and standard deviation from reported quantiles.","authors":"Xiaoyu Tang, Tiejun Tong, Xin Zhang, Haitao Chu","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10090","DOIUrl":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10090","url":null,"abstract":"Meta-analysis is a cornerstone of evidence synthesis, yet challenges arise when studies report heterogeneous summary statistics, such as means and standard deviations (SDs) versus medians, interquartile ranges (IQRs), or other percentiles. Excluding studies that report only medians and IQRs can introduce bias and reduce precision, particularly when outcomes are skewed, which is common in clinical research. Although several methods exist to estimate means and SDs from alternative summaries, many rely on strong normality assumptions, exhibit computational burden, or fail to adequately account for the precision of reported quantiles (e.g., extreme values versus medians). To address these limitations, we propose two flexible weighted estimators for estimating the mean and SD from reported quantiles. The methods leverage inverse-variance and inverse-variance-covariance weighting, respectively, to enhance both accuracy and precision. Additionally, our methods are flexible enough to accommodate any set of reported quantiles and various underlying distributions, and they can be readily implemented using standard statistical software. Simulation studies demonstrate that the weighted estimators provide nearly unbiased estimates of the mean and SD with high precision in most cases, especially for large sample sizes. In a real-world meta-analysis, the estimates obtained using the proposed estimators closely aligned with those derived from true sample statistics. These approaches are particularly valuable for skewed outcomes and offer a practical and user-friendly solution for researchers seeking to integrate heterogeneous data while improving accuracy and precision.","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":" ","pages":"958-975"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147687258","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Non-dissemination in qualitative health research-A retrospective cohort study of conference abstracts. 质性健康研究中的非传播——会议摘要的回顾性队列研究。

IF 8 2区生物学

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-04-14 DOI: 10.1017/rsm.2026.10085

Marwin Weber, Markus Toews, Waldemar Siemens, Andrew Booth, Simon Lewin, Heather Menzies Munthe-Kaas, Claire Glenton, Jane Noyes, Joerg J Meerpohl, Ingrid Toews

{"title":"Non-dissemination in qualitative health research-A retrospective cohort study of conference abstracts.","authors":"Marwin Weber, Markus Toews, Waldemar Siemens, Andrew Booth, Simon Lewin, Heather Menzies Munthe-Kaas, Claire Glenton, Jane Noyes, Joerg J Meerpohl, Ingrid Toews","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10085","DOIUrl":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10085","url":null,"abstract":"Dissemination bias can occur when qualitative research is published selectively, potentially reducing the confidence in qualitative evidence. This retrospective cohort study aims to quantify the extent of non-dissemination of qualitative health research by following 1,123 conference abstracts. The proportion of non-dissemination, the time to publication, as well as associations between author or study characteristics and full publication were examined. For 22.8% of these studies, no full publication could be identified within at least 6 and up to 8 years after their presentation. For those that were published, median time to publication was 11 months (95% CI 10 to 12). Studies from authors affiliated with institutions in Australia were more likely to be published than those from North America (OR 4.47; 95% CI 1.58 to 18.74). Oral presentations were more likely to be published than poster presentations (OR 3.40; 95% CI 1.57 to 8.20). Studies that used two qualitative data collection methods were more likely to be published than studies that used one qualitative method only (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.01 to 2.38). Conference abstracts that reported no funding were less likely to be published than those which reported funding (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.51 to 0.99). Publicly funded research was more likely to be published than privately funded research (OR 2.24; 95% CI 1.16 to 4.28). Given the considerable proportion of unpublished health-related qualitative studies, there is a reason to believe that dissemination bias may impact negatively on qualitative evidence synthesis. This can, in turn, impair decision-making that uses qualitative evidence.","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":" ","pages":"927-938"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147669304","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A novel approach for visualizing local consistency in network meta-analysis. 网络元分析中局部一致性可视化的新方法。

IF 8 2区生物学

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-04-07 DOI: 10.1017/rsm.2026.10082

Huw Wilson, Anton Schönstein, Sarah Robson, Federico Bonofiglio

{"title":"A novel approach for visualizing local consistency in network meta-analysis.","authors":"Huw Wilson, Anton Schönstein, Sarah Robson, Federico Bonofiglio","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10082","DOIUrl":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10082","url":null,"abstract":"Network meta-analysis is the established method to pool evidence from multiple clinical trials and make direct and indirect comparisons between different treatments. To ensure its validity, one of the major assumptions requiring examination is that the different sources of information are consistent, which is to say that the direct and indirect effect estimates agree. There are at least three different aspects to consider: (1) the original effect sizes of the direct and indirect treatment effects and their relative contribution to the total evidence; (2) the difference between them and its associated uncertainty/significance; and (3) the type of difference between them, that is, whether the direct and indirect estimates agree that a treatment is beneficial or harmful. Current visualization approaches typically use forest plots or heat maps, but these are limited as at least one of the above aspects is usually absent. Furthermore, as the number of treatments in the network increases, these visualizations can become difficult to understand. We present a visualization that combines the three aspects without being too difficult to interpret, outline the mathematical background and provide the code to produce it in R.","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":" ","pages":"912-926"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147626472","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Methods for conducting searches in healthcare reviews: A systematic review. 在医疗保健综述中进行搜索的方法：一项系统综述。

IF 8 2区生物学

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-08-27 DOI: 10.1017/rsm.2026.10112

Justin Clark, Elaine Beller, Connor Forbes, Luis Furuya-Kanamori, Sharon Sanders

{"title":"Methods for conducting searches in healthcare reviews: A systematic review.","authors":"Justin Clark, Elaine Beller, Connor Forbes, Luis Furuya-Kanamori, Sharon Sanders","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10112","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rsm.2026.10112","url":null,"abstract":"The standard approach for identifying studies for reviews has remained consistent for many years. This approach can be time-consuming, with quality reliant on searcher skill. Alternate approaches aiming to improve efficiency have been proposed, but there is uncertainty around their performance. To inform searching conduct, we systematically reviewed studies comparing alternate and standard search approaches. We searched PubMed and the Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts (LISTA) databases on 22 January 2025, browsed the Summarized Research in Information Retrieval for HTA (SuRe Info) website, reviewed reference lists of reviews and book chapters, and conducted a backwards and forwards citation search of included studies. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using a modified version of Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool version 2 (QUADAS-2), and alternate approaches were categorised according to whether they potentially (1) improved search conduct, (2) worsened search conduct, or (3) had an impact that was difficult to interpret. We identified 3,520 records and included 14 studies evaluating 12 alternative search approaches. We identified four approaches that potentially improve searches, six which may make searches worse, and two with difficult to interpret results. Most studies had high or unclear RoB arising from the standard search conduct and concern regarding the applicability of the results. Searches may be improved by (1) using seed studies to design searches; (2) adding study design filters; (3) adding backwards citation searching; (4) using automation tools for translating searches across databases. More robust evaluations are needed before we can make stronger recommendations.","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":" ","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0,"publicationDate":"2026-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148823647","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Reframing workload saving in LLM-assisted screening: A commentary on Sciurti et al. 重新构建llm辅助筛选的工作量节省：对Sciurti等人的评论。

IF 8 2区生物学

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-08-27 DOI: 10.1017/rsm.2026.10114

Honghao Lai, Jiayi Liu, Long Ge, Janne Estill

引用次数: 0

Incorporating estimands into meta-analyses of clinical trials. 将评估纳入临床试验的荟萃分析。

IF 8 2区生物学

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-07-30 DOI: 10.1017/rsm.2026.10107

Antonio Remiro-Azócar, Pepa Polavieja, Emmanuelle Boutmy, Alessandro Ghiretti, Lise Lotte Nystrup Husemoen, Khadija Rerhou Rantell, Tatsiana Vaitsiakhovich, David M Phillippo, Jay J H Park, Helle Lynggaard, Robert Bauer, Antonia Morga

{"title":"Incorporating estimands into meta-analyses of clinical trials.","authors":"Antonio Remiro-Azócar, Pepa Polavieja, Emmanuelle Boutmy, Alessandro Ghiretti, Lise Lotte Nystrup Husemoen, Khadija Rerhou Rantell, Tatsiana Vaitsiakhovich, David M Phillippo, Jay J H Park, Helle Lynggaard, Robert Bauer, Antonia Morga","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rsm.2026.10107","url":null,"abstract":"The estimand framework is increasingly established to pose research questions in confirmatory clinical trials. In evidence synthesis, the uptake of estimands has been modest, and the population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) framework is more often applied. While PICOs and estimands have overlapping elements, the estimand framework explicitly considers different strategies for intercurrent events. We propose a pragmatic framework for the use of estimands in meta-analyses of clinical trials, highlighting the value of estimands to systematically identify and mitigate key sources of quantitative heterogeneity, and to enhance the applicability or external validity of pooled estimates. Focus is placed on the role of strategies for intercurrent events, within the specific context of meta-analyses for health technology assessment. We apply the estimand framework to a network meta-analysis of clinical trials, comparing the efficacy of semaglutide versus dulaglutide in type 2 diabetes. We explore the impact of a treatment policy strategy for treatment discontinuation or initiation of rescue medication versus a hypothetical strategy for the corresponding intercurrent events. The specification of different target estimands at the meta-analytical level allows us to be explicit about the source of heterogeneity, the intercurrent event strategy, driving any potential differences in results. We advocate for the integration of estimands into the planning of meta-analyses, while acknowledging that potential challenges exist in the absence of subject-level data. Estimands can complement PICOs to strengthen communication between stakeholders about what evidence syntheses seek to demonstrate, and to ensure that the generated evidence is maximally relevant to healthcare decision-makers.","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":" ","pages":"1-28"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0,"publicationDate":"2026-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148617728","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A new method for detecting the skewness of data from the five-number summary. 一种检测五数汇总数据偏度的新方法。

IF 8 2区生物学

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-07-30 DOI: 10.1017/rsm.2026.10111

Sanying Feng, Hongmei Lin, Jiandong Shi, Sung Nok Chiu, Tiejun Tong

{"title":"A new method for detecting the skewness of data from the five-number summary.","authors":"Sanying Feng, Hongmei Lin, Jiandong Shi, Sung Nok Chiu, Tiejun Tong","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rsm.2026.10111","url":null,"abstract":"For clinical trials with continuous outcomes, researchers may opt to report the whole or part of the five-number summary rather than the sample mean and standard deviation, especially when the outcome data are skewed. To include such studies in meta-analysis, several popular methods have been proposed in the literature that convert the five-number summary back to the sample mean and standard deviation. Nevertheless, most existing methods are based on the normality assumption, which may not hold for the clinical studies with the five-number summary being reported. Recently, Shi et al. (2023, Stat Methods Med Res, 32, 1338-1360) and Balakrishnan et al. (2023, Math Methods Stat, 32, 260-273) proposed methods for detecting the skewness of data that utilize the whole or part of the five-number summary, together with the sample size. In this article, we show that the max-type test of Shi et al. is not only structurally complex but also conservative in controlling the type I error rate, whereas the test of Balakrishnan et al. has difficulty controlling the type I error rate with small sample sizes. Inspired by these findings, we develop a novel test statistic that leverages the ratio of two tails, a measure known for its heightened sensitivity to data skewness. Simulation results demonstrate that our ratio-based test is both less conservative and more powerful compared to the existing methods, especially when the alternative distribution exhibits mild skewness. Additionally, simulated meta-analyses and real-world data examples are presented to demonstrate the utility of our new method in the context of meta-analysis.","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0,"publicationDate":"2026-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148617678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Doubly robust augmented weighting estimators for the analysis of externally controlled single-arm trials and unanchored indirect treatment comparisons. 用于分析外部控制单臂试验和非锚定间接治疗比较的双鲁棒增广加权估计器。

IF 8 2区生物学

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-07-03 DOI: 10.1017/rsm.2026.10106

Harlan Campbell, Antonio Remiro-Azócar

{"title":"Doubly robust augmented weighting estimators for the analysis of externally controlled single-arm trials and unanchored indirect treatment comparisons.","authors":"Harlan Campbell, Antonio Remiro-Azócar","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rsm.2026.10106","url":null,"abstract":"Externally controlled single-arm trials are critical to assess treatment efficacy across therapeutic indications for which randomized controlled trials are not feasible. A closely-related research design, the unanchored indirect treatment comparison, is often required for disconnected treatment networks in health technology assessment. We present a unified causal inference framework for both research designs. We develop an estimator that augments a popular weighting approach based on entropy balancing-matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC)-by fitting a model for the conditional outcome expectation. The predictions of the outcome model are combined with the entropy balancing MAIC weights. While the standard MAIC estimator is singly robust where the outcome model is non-linear, our augmented MAIC approach is doubly robust (DR), providing increased robustness against model misspecification. This is demonstrated in a simulation study with binary outcomes and a logistic outcome model, where the augmented estimator demonstrates its DR property, while exhibiting higher precision than all non-augmented weighting estimators and near-identical precision to G-computation. We describe the extension of our estimator to the setting with unavailable individual participant data for the external control, illustrating it through an applied example. Our findings reinforce the understanding that entropy balancing-based approaches have desirable properties compared to standard \"modeling\" approaches to weighting, but should be augmented to improve protection against bias and guarantee double robustness.","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":" ","pages":"1-34"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0,"publicationDate":"2026-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148373804","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A comparison of preprint search aggregators: comprehensive identification of preprints in the information retrieval stage of evidence syntheses. 预印本搜索聚合器的比较：证据综合信息检索阶段预印本的综合识别。

IF 8 2区生物学

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-06-17 DOI: 10.1017/rsm.2026.10101

Zahra Premji, Sarah McGill, Amy Riegelman

{"title":"A comparison of preprint search aggregators: comprehensive identification of preprints in the information retrieval stage of evidence syntheses.","authors":"Zahra Premji, Sarah McGill, Amy Riegelman","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rsm.2026.10101","url":null,"abstract":"This study investigated information retrieval of preprint records in the context of evidence synthesis work and compared 12 sources used to discover preprints. Identification of grey literature is often required or recommended in evidence synthesis guidance, and preprints are categorized as grey literature. The purpose of this work is to inform how and where to search for preprints to maximize coverage (through exploration of preprint server across aggregators and databases) while balancing search efficiency. Authors selected aggregators and databases hosting two or more preprint servers and then tested search functionality and extracted characteristics and features. Authors analyzed and compared the selected sources, tabulated the number of essential features, and created comparison tables reflecting database and aggregator features. The study protocol was registered in Open Science Framework registries. Preprint aggregators and databases differ in their content coverage, and their ability to design a comprehensive and reproducible search strategy. Limitations such as character or word limits for queries, limited advanced search operators, and missing export functionality affect the usability of aggregators for evidence synthesis searches. Ongoing updates to search interfaces and functionality and differing approaches to versioning make it challenging to study discovery of preprints across sources. The recommendations and scenarios in this article will assist searchers engaged in evidence synthesis to make informed decisions about where to search for preprints.","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":" ","pages":"1-26"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0,"publicationDate":"2026-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148262575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Evaluating the accuracy and speed of eight deduplication tools: A comparative study. 8种重复数据删除工具的准确性和速度评估：比较研究。

IF 8 2区生物学

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-06-17 DOI: 10.1017/rsm.2026.10100

Sarah Bateup, Helen Fulbright, Klas Moberg, Kaitlyn Hair, Emmy Peterson, Claire M Stansfield, Riaz Qureshi, Justin Clark

{"title":"Evaluating the accuracy and speed of eight deduplication tools: A comparative study.","authors":"Sarah Bateup, Helen Fulbright, Klas Moberg, Kaitlyn Hair, Emmy Peterson, Claire M Stansfield, Riaz Qureshi, Justin Clark","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rsm.2026.10100","url":null,"abstract":"A key task in conducting systematic reviews is deduplicating the results from database searching. Deduplication using reference management software can be time-consuming and prone to error, while automated tools can be expensive and lack transparency. To support review teams, we evaluated eight deduplication tools: (1) The Automated Systematic Search Deduplicator (ASySD); (2) Covidence; (3) Deduklick; (4) EPPI-Reviewer; (5) PICO Portal; (6) Rayyan; (7) The Systematic Review Accelerator (SRA) Deduplicator: Focused; (8) The SRA Deduplicator: Relaxed. Five randomly selected Cochrane reviews had their searches rerun to create five gold standard sets. We compared the gold standard sets to the outputs of the eight deduplication tools and evaluated the results for: (1) unique records removed; (2) duplicate records retained; (3) time taken to deduplicate. Summed across all five reviews, the unique records removed in error ranged from 2 to 22. The three best tools were: (1) Rayyan; (2) Covidence; (3) SRA Deduplicator: Focused. The duplicate records retained in error ranged from 34 to 280, the three best tools were: (1) ASySD; (2) Rayyan; (3) EPPI-Reviewer. The time taken to deduplicate ranged from one minute to 20 hours and 34 minutes, the three fastest tools were: (1) SRA Deduplicator: Relaxed; (2) Deduklick; (3) Covidence. No tool performed so poorly that we don't recommend using it. But, as all the tools had strengths and weaknesses, some are expensive while others require large amounts of manual checking time, we recommend review teams compare the tools across all three outcomes and choose the tool that best suits their needs.","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0,"publicationDate":"2026-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148262567","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0