SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Assessing the quality of published genetic association studies in meta-analyses: the quality of genetic studies (Q-Genie) tool
5 references·2 citing·27 second hop
Assessing the quality of published genetic association studies in meta-analyses: the quality of genetic studies (Q-Genie) tool (2015)Assessing the quality of published geneti…The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses (2014)The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (N…Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses (2010)Critical evaluation of the Ne…STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)— An Extension of the STROBE Statement (2009)STrengthening the REporting o…AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2009)AMSTAR is a reliable and vali…Health Measurement Scales (2008)Health Measurement ScalesTools for assessing quality and risk of bias in Mendelian randomization studies: a systematic review (2022)Tools for assessing quality a…Empirical evaluation of the Q-Genie tool: a protocol for assessment of effectiveness (2016)Empirical evaluation of the Q…The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration (2007)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies (2007)Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) (2015)Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD Statement (2015)Reporting guidelines for health care simulation research: extensions to the CONSORT and STROBE statements (2016)A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales (1960)Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. (1968)STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT (1986)Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions (2011)Risks of all-cause and suicide mortality in mental disorders: a meta-review (2014)Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews (2014)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)Are healthcare workers’ intentions to vaccinate related to their knowledge, beliefs and attitudes? a systematic review (2013)The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta‐analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review (2015)Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better? (2020)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies (2007)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)Reporting and methodological quality of studies that use Mendelian randomisation in UK Biobank: a meta-epidemiological study (2022)Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide (2006)Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires (2006)Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross‐cultural health care research: a clear and user‐friendly guideline (2010)SANRA—a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles (2019)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2014The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses17,633 cited
  • 2010Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses17,378 cited
  • 2008Health Measurement Scales2,628 cited
  • 2009AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews1,756 cited
  • 2009STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)— An Extension of the STROBE Statement805 cited

Cited by

  • 2022Tools for assessing quality and risk of bias in Mendelian randomization studies: a systematic review95 cited
  • 2016Empirical evaluation of the Q-Genie tool: a protocol for assessment of effectiveness46 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work