References

• 1997Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test56,637 cited
• 1995Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials5,560 cited
• 2005Why Most Published Research Findings Are False4,702 cited
• 2001The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration3,828 cited
• 2000Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research Designs3,561 cited
• 1998Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?3,560 cited
• 1991Publication bias in clinical research3,110 cited
• 1999The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis1,981 cited
• 2004Better Reporting of Harms in Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement1,588 cited
• 1992A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction1,517 cited
• 1995Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: An annotated bibliography of scales and checklists1,306 cited
• 1987Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials1,253 cited
• 1997Discrepancies between Meta-Analyses and Subsequent Large Randomized, Controlled Trials1,170 cited
• 2001