Addressing challenges in reviewing e-cigarette evidence: proposing a new ‘Test for Dominance’ in systematic reviews

Clicks: 30
ID: 320404
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #40 of 154 articles by views in turkish journal of public health

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 154 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background Current systematic review evidence on e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool is contested. Part of the reason for this is the difficulty of objectively assessing the limited and heterogeneous evidence base. The study aim was to develop a novel approach to testing the validity of systematic reviews and assessing the extent of the dominance of included primary studies. Methods Leave-one-out meta-analysis was used to measure dominance. The systematic review on e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool by Hanewinkel et al. was used as a proof of concept. Results The Hajek et al. study dominates the Hanewinkel et al. systematic review, exerting a disproportionate influence on the overall pooled effect. Conclusions This research has identified a gap in current approaches to validity testing in systematic reviews. The Test for Dominance could supplement existing testing, including tests for heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis, and subgroup analysis. When a single study dominates a systematic review, the findings of that review should be interpreted with caution and further randomised controlled trials undertaken to reduce such distortion.
Reference Key
openalex_W7167943926 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Garth Reid, Glenna Nightingale, Nason Maani, Mike Smith, Mark Petticrew
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal turkish journal of public health
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/pubmed/fdaf149
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdaf149
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.