SZodixStudyAcademic Library
DashboardShelvesOpen accessMy libraryInboxNotesWriteLearnAlerts
More
Ask your libraryNotificationsQuick citeReview
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Comparative Effectiveness Review Methods: Clinical Heterogeneity
0 references·8 citing·30 second hop
Comparative Effectiveness Review Methods: Clinical Heterogeneity (2010)Comparative Effectiveness Review Methods:…A meta-analysis towards the effectiveness of startup accelerators (2025)A meta-analysis towards the e…Educational outcomes of digital serious games in nursing education: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (2024)Educational outcomes of digit…Methodological assessment of systematic reviews of in-vitro dental studies (2022)Methodological assessment of …EEG power spectral measures of cognitive workload: A meta‐analysis (2022)EEG power spectral measures o…A systematic survey identified 36 criteria for assessing effect modification claims in randomized trials or meta-analyses (2019)A systematic survey identifie…Methodological Challenges to the Evaluation of Interventions for Foster/Kinship Carers and Children: A Systematic Review (2017)Methodological Challenges to …An approach to addressing subpopulation considerations in systematic reviews: the experience of reviewers supporting the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (2017)An approach to addressing sub…Consensus-based recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews (2013)Consensus-based recommendatio…Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)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)A process for assessing the feasibility of a network meta-analysis: a case study of everolimus in combination with hormonal therapy versus chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer (2014)Applicable or non-applicable: investigations of clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews (2016)Heterogeneity in meta-analyses: an unavoidable challenge worth exploring (2025)Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis (2002)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)Evidence Clearinghouses as Tools to Advance Health Equity: What We Know from a Systematic Scan (2023)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement (2015)A pragmatic randomised controlled trial of the fostering changes programme (2020)Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: a critical appraisal of guidelines and practice (2002)Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses (2010)How to Use a Subgroup Analysis (2014)Investigating treatment-effect modification by a continuous covariate in IPD meta-analysis: an approach using fractional polynomials (2022)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Using machine learning methods and EEG to discriminate aircraft pilot cognitive workload during flight (2023)What Disrupts Flow in Office Work? The Impact of Frequency and Relevance of IT-Mediated Interruptions (2023)Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2007)Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis (2014)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Most systematic reviews reporting adherence to AMSTAR 2 had critically low methodological quality: a cross-sectional meta-research study (2023)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2019)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage (1991)The Theory of Economic Development (2003)
this work references cited by second hop

References

No references inside the corpus for this window.

Cited by

  • 2022EEG power spectral measures of cognitive workload: A meta‐analysis256 cited
  • 2013Consensus-based recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews116 cited
  • 2024Educational outcomes of digital serious games in nursing education: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials59 cited
  • 2022Methodological assessment of systematic reviews of in-vitro dental studies36 cited
  • 2019A systematic survey identified 36 criteria for assessing effect modification claims in randomized trials or meta-analyses24 cited
  • 2017Methodological Challenges to the Evaluation of Interventions for Foster/Kinship Carers and Children: A Systematic Review22 cited
  • 2017An approach to addressing subpopulation considerations in systematic reviews: the experience of reviewers supporting the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force17 cited
  • 2025A meta-analysis towards the effectiveness of startup accelerators12 cited

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