Corrigendum to “Robotic percutaneous coronary intervention and the clinical effectiveness debate: Is newer always better? A systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis” [Cardiovasc Revascularization Med 76 (2025) 113–120]
20260 citationsJournal Article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact: 0.00
Corrigendum to “Robotic percutaneous coronary intervention and the clinical effectiveness debate: Is newer always better? A systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis” [Cardiovasc Revascularization Med 76 (2025) 113–120] | Researchclopedia