References

1.
Aeon, B., Faber, A. & Panaccio, A. Does time management work? A meta-analysis. PLOS ONE 16, e0245066 (2021).
2.
Claessens, B. J. C., Eerde, W. van, Rutte, C. G. & Roe, R. A. A review of the time management literature. Personnel Review 36, 255–276 (2007).
3.
4.
5.
Boeker, M., Vach, W. & Motschall, E. Google scholar as replacement for systematic literature searches: Good relative recall and precision are not enough. BMC Medical Research Methodology 13, (2013).
6.
Bramer, W. M. Variation in number of hits for complex searches in google scholar. Journal of the Medical Library Association 104, (2016).
7.
Mbuagbaw, L., Lawson, D. O., Puljak, L., Allison, D. B. & Thabane, L. A tutorial on methodological studies: The what, when, how and why. BMC Medical Research Methodology 20, (2020).
8.
Callcut, R. A. & Branson, R. D. How to read a review paper. Respir. Care 54, 1379–1385 (2009).
9.
10.
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M. & Minder, C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315, 629–634 (1997).
11.
12.
Grudniewicz, A. et al. Predatory journals: No definition, no defence. Nature 576, 210–212 (2019).
13.
Schachman, H. K. What is misconduct in science? Science 261, 148–149 (1993).
14.
Steneck, N. H. Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions. Science and Engineering Ethics 12, 53–74 (2006).
15.
16.
Pittenger, D. Measuring the MBTI … and coming up short. Journal of Career Planning and Employment 54, (1993).