SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Letter to the Editor · Study

WorkLetter to the Editor

Richard D Riley2007

Work2007

Letter to the Editor

Richard D Riley · Greta F Ridley · Katrina Jane Williams · Douglas G. Altman · Jill Alison Hayden · Henrica C. W. de Vet

70 citations·0/0 files stored·Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Health Sciences Research and Education Statistical Methods in Epidemiology

Abstract

No abstract was published for this record.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 70 citations exist upstream.

References

2003Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD Initiative 2001The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials 2005Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK)2006Evaluation of the Quality of Prognosis Studies in Systematic Reviews 2001Systematic reviews of evaluations of prognostic variables 2005Selective Reporting Biases in Cancer Prognostic Factor Studies 2003Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future 2005Identification of Clinically Useful Cancer Prognostic Factors: What Are We Missing?

Cited by

2015Multivariate meta‐analysis of prognostic factor studies with multiple cut‐points and/or methods of measurement 2022Structured reporting to improve transparency of analyses in prognostic marker studies 2020Doug Altman: Driving critical appraisal and improvements in the quality of methodological and medical research 2019The increasing need for systematic reviews of prognosis studies: strategies to facilitate review production and improve quality of primary research

Related works

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

2012Chapter 12: Systematic Review of Prognostic Testsreview · 6 shared references 2010Evaluating the Quality of Research into a Single Prognostic Biomarker: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 83 Studies of C-Reactive Protein in Stable Coronary Artery Diseasereview · 5 shared references 2007Quality of Reporting of Cancer Prognostic Marker Studies: Association With Reported Prognostic Effectarticle · 5 shared references 2022Structured reporting to improve transparency of analyses in prognostic marker studiesarticle · 5 shared references 2020Doug Altman: Driving critical appraisal and improvements in the quality of methodological and medical researchreview · 5 shared references 2009Prognostic markers in cancer: the evolution of evidence from single studies to meta-analysis, and beyondreview · 4 shared references

Details

Year2007

Typeother

Published2007-06-07

VenueJournal of Clinical Epidemiology

ISSN-L0895-4356

Languageen

Citations70

Files0 public / 0

ShelfMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Identifiers

doi10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.02.004

openalex_workW1480653276

Links

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.