deletions | additions       diff --git a/untitled.tex b/untitled.tex  index 6eb8c72..d294159 100644  --- a/untitled.tex  +++ b/untitled.tex 
...
\section{Abstract and Key Words}  \subsection{\textbf{Aim:}} \subsubsection{}  {\textbf{Aim:}}  To evaluate the reporting of methodological quality measures in systematic reviews and meta-analyses in oncology journals.   \textbf{Methods:} We formulated an 11-item quality measure abstraction manual for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. We performed a systematic search for the articles through PubMed on the 18 and 26 of May 2015. Covidence was used to screen articles based on the title and abstract. The methodological quality and reporting of risk of bias were evaluated by three rounds of coding from two independent reviewers using the same checklist.Studies that were excluded include meta-analyses that were not the focus of the study,scoping reviews,case reports, individual patient data meta-analyses, and narrative reviews. Differences in assessment were resolved through group consensus between the two independent reviewers. Data analyses were conducted through Microsoft Excel 2007, and STATA 13.1 software.   \textbf{Results:} 258 articles were identified to meet initial search criteria. Quality assessment was conducted on 182 articles after exclusion of 
...