Figure and Table | Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients with Hematological Malignancy Compared to Healthy Controls: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Table 1. Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study Types.

From: Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients with Hematological Malignancy Compared to Healthy Controls: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Characteristics	Inclusion	Exclusion
Population	Adult participants over 18 years with hematological malignancy and had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine.	Patients with any other diseases and/or any group other than healthy populations.
Intervention (Exposure)	First, second, or booster doses of COVID-19 vaccination	Nonvaccinated population
Comparison	Immune response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with hematological malignancies and healthy control group. Immunoglobulin G (IgG) level, Neutralizing antibody (nAb) level	Any malignancy other than patients with hematological malignancies, i.e., solid tumor.
Outcome	Rates of seropositivity after one or two doses of COVID-19 vaccine, rates of positive nAb response after one or two doses of vaccine.	Side effects (if any) of the vaccines on the exposed and healthy group, cross-classification of the rates of seropositivity, and rates of positive nAb response with respect to other potential confounders.
Study type	All types of observational studies, experimental studies, and clinical trials.	Incomplete studies, studies not reporting any antibody level, and studies reporting CD4 and CD8 cell count in response to COVID-19 vaccination.

» Back to article page

Table 2. Search Strategies.

From: Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients with Hematological Malignancy Compared to Healthy Controls: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Characteristics	Description
Databases	Medline via PubMed
	EMBASE
	WHO COVID-19 Research Database
	Cochrane Library
Other searches	Manual search using Keywords in Google Scholar
Other searches	Reference list from selected articles
Boolean operators	AND
Boolean operators	OR
Antibody or seroconversion-related keywords, MeSH terms	“Antibody formation”
	“Seroconversion”
	“Antibodies, neutralizing”
	“Neutralizing Antibodies”
	“seropositive*”
	“seroconversion*”
	“Antibody produce*”
	“Antibody response*”
	“Neutralizing antibody*”
Hematologic malignancy-related keywords, MeSH terms	“Primary Myelofibrosis”
	“Polycythemia Vera”
	“Myelodysplastic Syndromes”
	“Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia”
	“Lymphoma”
	“Multiple Myeloma”
	“Multiple Myeloma”
	“Leukemia”
	“Leukemia”
	“Hematologic Neoplasms”
	“Hematologic neoplasm*”
	“Hematologic malignan*”
	“malignant*”
	“neoplasm*”
	“hematologic*”
	“hematologic*”
COVID-19-related keywords, MeSH terms	“Vaccination”
	“COVID-19 vaccines/administration and dosage”
	“COVID-19 vaccines/immunology”
	“SARS-COV-2 VACCINES”
	“COVID-19 VACCINES”

» Back to article page

Table 3. Population Characteristics of the Included Studies.

From: Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients with Hematological Malignancy Compared to Healthy Controls: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Study information	Population			Exposure			Comparison	Outcome		Risk of bias
First Author, Year, Country, Study design	Seroconversion in patients’ group (S.R-Seroconversion rate)	Hematological malignancy type	Age in years, % of male	Vaccine	Dose interval	Dose administered	Comparison group, age in years, % of male	Seroconversion in healthy controls (S.R-Seroconversion rate)	Seroconversion cutoff value	Risk of bias
Aleman et al., 2021, USA, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	MM	Mean [range]: 65 [47–79], 63%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	28D or 21D	Second Dose	Healthy participants (n = 12), Mean [range]: 59 [45–64], 50%	12	≥3.2 AU/mL	7
	Patients (n = 44)							(n = 12)
	Seronegative (n = 27)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 17)
	S.R-39%
Avivi et al., 2021, Israel, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	MM, SM	Median [range]: 70 [38–94], 56%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	21D	Second Dose	Median [range]: 67 [41–84], 42.2%	63	≥0.8 IU/mL	7
	Patients (n = 171)							(n = 64)
	Seronegative (n = 38)							S.R-98%
	Seropositive (n = 133)
	S.R-78%
Bergman et al., 2021, Sweden, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	CLL	NA	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	21D	Second Dose	NA	69	≥0.8 U/mL	9
	Patients (n = 388)							(n = 2)
	Seronegative (n = 108)							S.R-95.8%
	Seropositive (n = 280)
	S.R-72%
Bitoun et al., 2021, France, Retrospective cohort	Dose 2:	MM	Median [range]: 71 [46–93], 44%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	28D	Second Dose	Median [range]: 58 [26–88], 28.6%	26	≥0.4 IU/mL	5
	Patients (n = 27)							(n = 28)
	Seronegative (n = 3)							S.R-96%
	Seropositive (n = 24)
	S.R-89%
Canti et al., 2021, Belgium, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	alloHCT	Median [range]: 60 [26–76], 47.5%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	21D	Second Dose	Median [range]: 48 [23–64], 27.5%	40	≥5 IU/mL	8
	Patients (n = 37)							S.R-88%
	Seronegative (n = 5)
	Seropositive (n = 32)
	S.R-86%
Chowdhury et al., 2021, UK, Retrospective cohort	Dose 1:	CML, ET, PV, MF, MDS	Median [IQR]: 62 [52–73], 45.8%	BNT162b2, AZD1222	2 W	First Dose	Median [range]: 62 [60–76]	224	≥50 AU/mL	6
	Patients (n = 59)							(n = 232)
	Seronegative (n = 25)							S.R-97%
	Seropositive (n = 34)
	S.R-58%
Chung et al., 2021, USA, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	leukemia, lymphoma, MM	Median [range]: 65 [22–97], 56.4%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	28D or 21D	First Dose and Second Dose	Median [range]: 31 [22–67]	First Dose: 59	Immunoassay ≥50.0 AU/mL	6
	Patients (n = 167)							(n = 59)
	Seronegative (n = 81)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 86)							Second Dose: 54
								(n = 54)
	Dose 2:							S.R-100%
	Patients (n = 456)
	Seronegative (n = 142)
	Seropositive (n = 314)
	S.R-51% & 69%
Crombie et al., 2021, USA, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	Lymphoma and CLL	Median [range]: 69 [30–82], 43.5%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	28D or 21D	First Dose and Second Dose	Median [range]: 24 [22–56], 43.5%	First Dose: 23	1.07	5
	Patients (n = 22)							Second Dose: 23
	Seronegative (n = 13)
	Seropositive (n = 9)

	Dose 2:
	Patients (n = 21)
	Seronegative (n = 9)
	Seropositive (n = 12)
	S.R-41% & 57%
Fiorino et al., 2021, Italy, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	MF	Median [range]: 67 [31–85], 50%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	3–4 W	Second Dose	NA	40	≥30%	7
	Patients (n = 42)							(n = 40)
	Seronegative (n = 10)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 32)
	S.R-76%
Gastinne et al., 2022, France, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	lymphoma, leukemia	Median [range]: 62 [21–79], 60%	BNT162b2	28D	Second Dose	NA	25	≥0.8 U/mL	6
	Patients (n = 20)
	Seronegative (n = 14)
	Seropositive (n = 6)
	S.R-30%
Gavriatopoulou et al., 2021, Greece, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	WM, CLL, NHL	Median [IQR]: 75 [40–88], 48.3%	BNT162b2, AZD1222	21D-3M	First Dose	NA	114	≥30% = positive, ≥50% = clinically relevant inhibition)	8
	Patients (n = 58)							(n = 232)
	Seronegative (n = 50)							S.R-54%
	Seropositive (n = 8)
	S.R-14%
Gavriatopoulou et al., 2021, Greece, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	WM	Median [IQR]: 73 [64–81], 43.4%	BNT162b2, AZD1222	21D-3M	First Dose and Second Dose	Median [IQR]: 66 [62–82], 46.2%	First Dose: 212	≥30% = positive, ≥50% = clinically relevant inhibition)	8
	Patients (n = 106)							Second Dose: 212
	Seronegative (n = 70)							S.R-96.2%
	Seropositive (n = 36)

	Dose 2:
	Patients (n = 74)
	Seronegative (n = 29)
	Seropositive (n = 45)
	S.R-34% & 61%
Ghione et al., 2021, USA, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	lymphoma	Median [range]: 70 [35–91], 52.3%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 and Ad26.COV2.S	28D or 21D	Second Dose	NA	154	≥1.0	6
	Patients (n = 86)							(n = 154)
	Seronegative (n = 50)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 36)
	S.R-42%
Guglielmelli et al., 2021, Italy, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	MF, ET, PV	NA	BNT162b2, AZD1222	28D or 21D	First Dose	NA	14	≥15 AU/mL	6
	Patients (n = 30)							(n = 14)
	Seronegative (n = 12)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 18)
	S.R-60%
Herishanu et al., 2021, Israel, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	CLL	Median [IQR]: 69.0 [63.0–73.7], 67.1%	BNT162b2	21D	Second Dose	Median [IQR]: 68 [64–74.7]	52	≥0.8 IU/mL = positive	8
	Patients (n = 52)							(n = 52)
	Seronegative (n = 25)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 27)
	S.R-52%
Jurgens et al., 2021, USA, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	Lymphoma and CLL	Median [range]: 71 [24–90], 53.7%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	28D or 21D	Second Dose	NA	35	10000	5
	Patients (n = 67)
	Seronegative (n = 36)
	Seropositive (n = 31)
	S.R-46%
Lim et al., 2021, UK, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	lymphoma	Median [IQR]: 69 [57–74], 62.8%	ChAdOx1, BNT162b2	10-12 W	First Dose and Second Dose	Median [IQR]: 45 [34–47], 33.3%	150	Meso scale discovery >0.55 BAU/mL, Anti–SARS-CoV-2 RBD IgG >0.73 BAU/mL	6
	Patients (n = 59)							(n = 150)
	Seronegative (n = 27)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 32)

	Dose 2:
	Patients (n = 86)
	Seronegative (n = 25)
	Seropositive (n = 61)
	S.R-54% & 71%
Mairhofer et al., 2021, Austria, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	Cancer	NA	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	28D or 21D	Second Dose	NA	28	≥50 IU/mL	7
	Patients (n = 45)							(n = 29)
	Seronegative (n = 19)							S.R-96.6%
	Seropositive (n = 26)
	S.R-58%
Malard et al., 2021, France, Retrospective cohort	Dose 2:	LM, MM	Median [range]: 68.9 [21.5–91.7], 59.7%	BNT162b2	28D	Second Dose	NA		≥50 AU/mL = positive; ≥3100 = neutralization)	9
	Patients (n = 196)
	Seronegative (n = 105)
	Seropositive (n = 91)
	S.R-46%
Marasco et al., 2022, Italy, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	LM	Median [range]: 56 [46–62], 56.3%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	28D or 21D	Second Dose	Median [range]: 56 [46–62], 56.3%	167	≥0.8 IU/mL	9
	Patients (n = 167)							(n = 167)
	Seronegative (n = 60)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 107)
	S.R-64%
Marchesi et al., 2022, Italy, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	MM	NA	BNT162b2	21D	Second Dose	NA	28	≥15 U/m	6
	Patients (n = 49)							(n = 28)
	Seronegative (n = 12)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 37)
	S.R-76%
McKenzie et al., 2021, UK, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	HM	Median [IQR]: 35 [27–48], 64.7%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	70D	Second Dose	Median [IQR]: 66 [52.75–73], 69.2%	22	antibody level ED50, nAb assay: IC50	5
	Patients (n = 51)							(n = 26)
	Seronegative (n = 29)							S.R-88%
	Seropositive (n = 22)
	S.R-43%
Monin et al., 2021, UK, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	Hematological Cancer	Median [IQR]: 73 [64.5–79.5], 52.3%	BNT162b2	21D	First Dose and Second Dose	Median [IQR]: 40.5 [31.3–50], 52.9%	First Dose: 32	≥70 EC50 = positive	7
	Patients (n = 44)							(n = 34)
	Seronegative (n = 36)							S.R-94%
	Seropositive (n = 8)							Second Dose: 12
								(n = 12)
	Dose 2:							S.R-100%
	Patients (n = 5)
	Seronegative (n = 2)
	Seropositive (n = 3)
	S.R-18% & 60%
Parry et al., 2022, UK, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	B cell CLL	Median [IQR]: 67 [60–72], 53%	AZD1222, BNT162b2	3 W	Second Dose	Median [IQR]: 71 [64–77], 55.9%	93	≥0.8	7
	Patients (n = 500)							(n = 93)
	Seronegative (n = 165)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 335)
	S.R-67%
Parry et al., 2021, UK, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	CLL	Median [IQR]: 69 [63–74], 54.7%	AZD1222, BNT162b2	12 W and 3 W	First Dose and Second Dose	NA	First Dose: 95	≥0.8	7
	Patients (n = 86)							Second Dose: 59
	Seronegative (n = 57)							(N = 95 & 59)
	Seropositive (n = 29)							S.R-100%

	Dose 2:
	Patients (n = 12)
	Seronegative (n = 3)
	Seropositive (n = 9)
	S.R-34% & 75%
Peeters et al., 2021, Belgium, Prospective multicohort	Dose 2:	Cancer	Median [range]: 63 [25–79], 58.5%	BNT162b2	21D	Second Dose	NA	Second Dose: 40	≥5 IU/mL	6
	Patients (n = 41)							(n = 40)
	Seronegative (n = 29)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 12)
	S.R-29%
Perry et al., 2021, Israel, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	B-NHL	Median [range]: 64 [20–92], 59.1%	BNT162b2	21D	Second Dose	Median [range]: 66 [25–83], 44.6%	65	≥0.8 IU/mL	8
	Patients (n = 149)							S.R-98.5%
	Seronegative (n = 76)
	Seropositive (n = 73)
	S.R-49%
Pimpinelli et al., 2021, Italy, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	MM, MPM	Median [range]: 73 [47–78]	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	21D	First Dose and Second Dose	Median [range]: 81 [79–87], 50%	First Dose: 36	≥15 U/m	9
	Patients (n = 92)		Median [range]: 70 [28–80], 53.3%					Second Dose: 36
	Seronegative (n = 57)							n = 36
	Seropositive (n = 35)							S.R-100%

	Dose 2:
	Patients (n = 92)
	Seronegative (n = 15)
	Seropositive (n = 77)
	S.R-38% & 84%
Rahav et al., 2021, Israel, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	CLL, NHL, MM, and MDS	Median [IQR]: 69 [61–74]	BNT162b2	21D	Second Dose	NA	269	≥1.1	9
	Patients (n = 529)		Median [IQR]: 66 [59–73]					(n = 272)
	Seronegative (n = 175)		Median [IQR]: 62 [49–70]					S.R-98.9%
	Seropositive (n = 354)		Median [IQR]: 73 [66–80], 58.8%
	S.R-67%
Schiller-Salton et al., 2021, Israel, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	MM	Mean ± SD: 67.8 ± 9.9, 58.50%	BNT162b2	30D	Second Dose	NA	Second Dose: 360	≥150 AU/mL	8
	Patients (n = 176)
	Seronegative (n = 47)
	Seropositive (n = 129)
	S.R-73%
Shem-Tov et al., 2022, Israel, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	HSCT	Mean ± SD: 58 ± 14.0, 63.20%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	21D	Second Dose	Mean ± SD: 55.6 ± 14.2, 24.3%	269	Cut point: >1.1	7
	Patients (n = 152)							(n = 272)
	Seronegative (n = 34)							S.R-98.9%
	Seropositive (n = 118)
	S.R-78%
Shen et al., 2021, Australia, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	CLL	Median [range]: 71.5 [22–94], 56.3%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222	2-4 W	Second Dose	NA	25	≥50 AU/mL	6
	Patients (n = 160)
	Seronegative (n = 72)
	Seropositive (n = 88)
	S.R-55%
Stampfer et al., 2021, USA, Retrospective cohort	Dose 1:	MM	Median [range]: 68 [35–88], 59.4%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	28D or 21D	First Dose and Second Dose	Median [range]: 61 [26–85]	First Dose: 31	50-250 IU/mL partial response, >250 IU/mL	8
	Patients (n = 96)							Second Dose: 31
	Seronegative (n = 76)							n-31
	Seropositive (n = 20)
								S.R-100%
	Dose 2:
	Patients (n = 96)
	Seronegative (n = 32)
	Seropositive (n = 64)
	S.R-21% & 67%
Terpos et al., 2021, Greece, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	CLL, NHL, HL	Mean ± SD: 64.6 ± 14.3, 50%	BNT162b2	21D	First Dose and Second Dose	Mean ± SD: 69.8 ± 12.5, 44.9%	First Dose: 152	GenScript (≥30% = positive, ≥30% = clinically relevant)	6
	Patients (n = 132)							(n = 214)
	Seronegative (n = 103)							S.R-71%
	Seropositive (n = 29)							Second Dose: 214
								(n = 214)
	Dose 2:							S.R-98.1%
	Patients (n = 132)
	Seronegative (n = 65)
	Seropositive (n = 67)
	S.R-22% & 51%
Terpos et al., 2021, Greece, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	MM, SM, MGUS	Median [IQR]: 74 [62–80], 54.7%	BNT162b2, AZD1222	21D-3M	First Dose and Second Dose	NA	First Dose: 145	GenScript (≥30% = positive, ≥30% = clinically relevant)	8
	Patients (n = 276)
	Seronegative (n = 159)							(n = 225)
	Seropositive (n = 117)
								S.R-64.2%
	Dose 2:							Second Dose: 204
	Patients (n = 276)							(n = 226)
	Seronegative (n = 80)							S.R-90.3%
	Seropositive (n = 196)
	S.R-42% & 71%
Terpos et al., 2021, Greece, Prospective cohort	Dose 1:	MM	Mean ± SD: 81.68 ± 7.63, 60.40%	BNT162b2	21D	First Dose	Mean ± SD: 81.56 ± 8.11, 54.8%	57	GenScript (≥30% = positive, ≥30% = clinically relevant)	8
	Patients (n = 48)							(n = 104)
	Seronegative (n = 36)							S.R-54.8%
	Seropositive (n = 12)
	S.R-25%

» Back to article page

Table 3. Population Characteristics of the Included Studies.

From: Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients with Hematological Malignancy Compared to Healthy Controls: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Study information	Population			Exposure			Comparison	Outcome
First Author, Year, Country, Study design	Seroconversion in patients’ group (S.R-Seroconversion rate)	Hematological malignancy type	Age in years, % of male	Vaccine	Dose interval	Dose administered	Comparison group, age in years, % of male	Seroconversion in healthy controls (S.R-Seroconversion rate)	Seroconversion cutoff value	Risk of bias
Thakkar et al., 2021, USA, Retrospective cohort	Dose 2:	HM	Median [range]: 67 [27–90], 42%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, Ad26.COV2.S	21D or 28D	Second Dose	NA	26	≥ 50 AU/mL	7
	Patients (n = 66)							(n = 26)
	Seronegative (n = 10)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 56)
	S.R-85%
Tzarfati et al., 2021, Israel, Prospective cohort	Dose 2:	HM	Median [IQR]: 70 [61–78], 55.9%	BNT162b2	21D	Second Dose	Median [IQR]: 69 [58–74], 43.5%	107	≥12 AU/mL positive)	8
	Patients (n = 315)							(n = 108)
	Seronegative (n = 80)							S.R-99%
	Seropositive (n = 235)
	S.R-75%
Van Oekelen et al., 2021, USA, Retrospective cohort	Dose 2:	MM	Median [range]: 68 [38–93], 58.1%	BNT162b2, mRNA-1273	28D or 21D	Second Dose	NA	67	5 AU/mL	8
	(n = 260)							(n = 67)
	Seronegative (n = 41)							S.R-100%
	Seropositive (n = 219)
	84%

» Back to article page

Table 4. Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for Risk of Bias Assessment of the Included Studies.

From: Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients with Hematological Malignancy Compared to Healthy Controls: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Study	Selection				Comparability	Outcome			Overall
Study	Representativeness of the exposed cohort	Selection of the nonexposed cohort	Ascertainment of exposure	Outcome not present at start		Assessment of outcome	Adequate follow-up length	Adequacy of follow up
Aleman et al., 2021 ⁽²²⁾	*		*	*	*	*	*	*	7
Avivi et al., 2021 ⁽²³⁾	*		*	*	*	*	*	*	7
Bergman et al., 2021 ⁽²⁴⁾	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*	9
Bitoun et al., 2021 ⁽²⁵⁾			*	*		*	*	*	5
Canti et al., 2021 ⁽²⁶⁾	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	8
Chowdhury et al., 2021 ⁽²⁷⁾	*		*	*		*	*	*	6
Chung et al., 2021 ⁽²⁸⁾	*		*	*		*	*	*	6
Crombie et al., 2021 ⁽²⁹⁾			*	*		*	*	*	5
Fiorino et al., 2021 ⁽³⁰⁾	*		*		**	*	*	*	7
Gastinne et al., 2022 ⁽³¹⁾	*		*	*		*	*	*	6
Gavriatopoulou et al., 2021 ⁽³²⁾	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	8
Gavriatopoulou et al., 2021 ⁽³³⁾	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	8
Ghione et al., 2021 ⁽³⁴⁾	*		*	*		*	*	*	6
Guglielmelli et al., 2021 ⁽³⁵⁾	*		*	*		*	*	*	6
Herishanu et al., 2021 ⁽³⁶⁾	*		*	*	**	*	*	*	8
Jurgens et al., 2021 ⁽³⁷⁾	*		*			*	*	*	5
Lim et al., 2021 ⁽³⁸⁾	*		*	*		*	*	*	6
Mairhofer et al., 2021 ⁽³⁹⁾	*	*	*	*		*	*	*	7
Malard et al., 2021 ⁽⁴⁰⁾	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*	9
Marasco et al., 2022 ⁽⁴¹⁾	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*	9
Marchesi et al., 2022 ⁽⁴²⁾	*		*	*		*	*	*	6
McKenzie et al., 2021 ⁽⁴³⁾			*	*		*	*	*	5
Monin et al., 2021 ⁽⁴⁴⁾	*	*	*	*		*	*	*	7
Parry et al., 2022 ⁽⁴⁵⁾	*		*	*	*	*	*	*	7
Parry et al., 2021 ⁽⁴⁶⁾	*		*	*	*	*	*	*	7
Peeters et al., 2021 ⁽⁴⁷⁾	*	*	*			*	*	*	6
Perry et al., 2021 ⁽⁴⁸⁾	*		*	*	**	*	*	*	8
Pimpinelli et al., 2021 ⁽⁴⁹⁾	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*	9
Rahav et al., 2021 ⁽⁵⁰⁾	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*	9
Schiller-Salton et al., 2021 ⁽⁵¹⁾	*	*	*		**	*	*	*	8
Shem-Tov et al., 2022 ⁽⁵²⁾	*		*		**	*	*	*	7
Shen et al., 2021 ⁽⁵³⁾			*	*	*	*	*	*	6
Stampfer et al., 2021 ⁽⁵⁴⁾	*	*	*		**	*	*	*	8
Terpos et al., 2021 ⁽⁵⁵⁾	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	8
Terpos et al., 2021 ⁽⁵⁶⁾	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	8
Terpos et al., 2021 ⁽⁵⁷⁾	*	*	*			*	*	*	6
Thakkar et al., 2021 ⁽⁵⁸⁾	*	*	*		*	*	*	*	7
Tzarfati et al., 2021 ⁽⁸⁾	*		*	*	**	*	*	*	8
Van Oekelen et al., 2021 ⁽⁵⁹⁾	*	*	*		**	*	*	*	8

» Back to article page