The following text reviews the relevant literature that supports the use of RM in CIED recipients.
Among 1,976 citations, 145 articles were suitable for full-text reviewing, and 17 studies were eventually selected.
Our broad search identified 1,583 studies, and finally 14 were included after abstract screening and full-text reviewing [ 11- 24].
For another, inclusion bias might exist because most studies were excluded after reviewing titles and abstracts but not through full-text reviewing, which might have limited the generalizability of the study findings.
10 917 abstracts were screened, and 231 full texts reviewed.
The full text review was performed by three reviewers (NT, RCW, EH) on retained studies.
For the full text review, a standardized form was filled independently by two reviewers (SR, DT).
Figure 4 illustrates a Text Review stage.
Figure 4 Text review stage in joint construction.
Of these, 97 were eligible for full text review.
Abstract review, full text review, and data abstraction were performed in duplicate.
