deletions | additions       diff --git a/textbf_Results_textbf_Literature_search__.tex b/textbf_Results_textbf_Literature_search__.tex  index d743e85..25c9acc 100644  --- a/textbf_Results_textbf_Literature_search__.tex  +++ b/textbf_Results_textbf_Literature_search__.tex 
...
\textbf{Literature search }  The Pubmed search resulted in 337 articles from four journals. After screening titles and abstracts via Covidence, 79 were excluded. Full-text article screening resulted in removal of an additional 74 articles which did not met the definition of a systematic review and/or meta-analysis. Additionally 2 studies could not be retrieved. In total 182 manuscripts were analyzed for heterogeneity (Figure 1).   \textbf{Stata 13.1 Heterogeneity assessment} \textbf{Heterogeneity Evaluation Practices}  Fifty percent (91/182) of all meta-analyses used at least one heterogeneity test (Table 1). The most widely reported statistic was I2 (41.21\%; 75/182) followed by X2 (24.18\%; 44/182). In combination, X2 and I2 (13.19\%; 24/182) were reported with greatest frequency followed by Q and I2 (12.64\%; 23/182). Authors selected a random effects model most frequently (25\%; 46/182), followed by use of both fixed and random-effect models (21\%; 39/182). Fixed effects models were reported in 4\% (8/182) of studies and a mixed effects model was used in only one study. The remaining 50\% (90/182) did not report the type of model used for analysis. Twenty-four percent (43/182) used the random-effects model without considering the results of a heterogeneity test to confirm the need for such an analysis; fifteen percent (27/182) changed from the fixed to random effects based on results of a heterogeneity test.The level of statistical significance for heterogeneity tests was reported in systematic reviews. The most frequently reported p-value was p < .05 (16\%, 29/182) followed by p< .01 (\%), p < .10 (\%), and p < .2 used in only one study. A forest plot was the most common heterogeneity plot (42\%, 76/182). Only 2\% (3/182) used a L’Abbé to graphically represent heterogeneity. Forty-three percent (78/182) of systematic reviews contained heterogeneity plots published as figures in the article.  
...