SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Assessing harmful effects in systematic Reviews
16 references·8 citing·38 second hop
Assessing harmful effects in systematic Reviews (2004)Assessing harmful effects in systematic R…The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses (2014)The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (N…Assessing the quality of research (2004)Assessing the quality of rese…Methodological index for non‐randomized studies ( MINORS ): development and validation of a new instrument (2003)Methodological index for non‐…Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)Evaluating non-randomised int…Balancing benefits and harms in health care (2003)Balancing benefits and harms …Systematic Reviews in Health Care. Meta-analysis in Context. (2002)Systematic Reviews in Health …Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta‐analysis in Context (2002)Systematic Reviews in Health …Reporting of adverse drug reactions in randomised controlled trials – a systematic survey (2001)Reporting of adverse drug rea…Incomplete evidence: the inadequacy of databases in tracing published adverse drug reactions in clinical trials (2001)Incomplete evidence: the inad…Completeness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas. (2001)Completeness of safety report…Assessment of therapeutic safety in systematic reviews: literature review (2001)Assessment of therapeutic saf…Assessing the Quality of Randomised Controlled Trials (2001)Assessing the Quality of Rand…Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials (2001)Assessing the quality of cont…Systematic Reviews in Health Care : Meta-Analysis in Context (2000)Systematic Reviews in Health …The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. (1998)The feasibility of creating a…The pocket guide to critical appraisal. (1996)The pocket guide to critical …Harms in Systematic Reviews Paper 2: Methods used to assess harms are neglected in systematic reviews of gabapentin (2021)Harms in Systematic Reviews P…Cannabis in the management of PTSD: a systematic review (2021)Cannabis in the management of…The reporting of safety among drug systematic reviews was poor before the implementation of the PRISMA harms checklist (2018)The reporting of safety among…Some improvements are apparent in identifying adverse effects in systematic reviews from 1994 to 2011 (2013)Some improvements are apparen…The Methods for the Synthesis of Studies without Control Groups (2009)The Methods for the Synthesis…Systematic reviews of adverse effects of drug interventions: a survey of their conduct and reporting quality (2009)Systematic reviews of adverse…Reporting of adverse events in systematic reviews can be improved: survey results (2008)Reporting of adverse events i…Assessing Harms When Comparing Medical Interventions (2008)Assessing Harms When Comparin…Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (1963)Empirical Evidence of Design-Related Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Tests (1999)The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis (1999)Quality of Reporting of Observational Longitudinal Research (2005)A hierarchy of evidence for assessing qualitative health research (2006)Recommendations by Cochrane Review Groups for assessment of the risk of bias in studies (2008)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care (2010)GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) (2011)Assessing risk of bias in prevalence studies: modification of an existing tool and evidence of interrater agreement (2012)Cumulative Meta-Analysis of Therapeutic Trials for Myocardial Infarction (1992)Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement (1996)Meta-Analysis, Decision Analysis, and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (1999)Reporting bias in medical research - a narrative review (2010)PRISMA harms checklist: improving harms reporting in systematic reviews (2016)Assessing the Risk of Bias of Individual Studies in Systematic Reviews of Health Care Interventions (2017)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)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)Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? (1998)The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials (2001)The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews (2003)Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews (2008)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Simpson's paradox and calculation of number needed to treat from meta-analysis (2002)A systematic comparison of software dedicated to meta-analysis of causal studies (2007)Discrimination and drinking: A systematic review of the evidence (2016)El Cuestionario de Salud SF-36 español: una década de experiencia y nuevos desarrollos (2005)Much ado about nothing: a comparison of the performance of meta‐analytical methods with rare events (2006)Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews? (2018)Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide (2006)Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses (2010)
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
  • 1998The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions.8,247 cited
  • 2003Methodological index for non‐randomized studies ( MINORS ): development and validation of a new instrument7,590 cited
  • 2001Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials3,309 cited
  • 2003Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies2,905 cited
  • 2000Systematic Reviews in Health Care : Meta-Analysis in Context2,307 cited
  • 2002Systematic Reviews in Health Care. Meta-analysis in Context.1,363 cited
  • 2001Completeness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas.564 cited
  • 2004Assessing the quality of research390 cited
  • 2002Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta‐analysis in Context249 cited
  • 2001Assessing the Quality of Randomised Controlled Trials238 cited
  • 1996The pocket guide to critical appraisal.164 cited
  • 2001Reporting of adverse drug reactions in randomised controlled trials – a systematic survey128 cited
  • 2001Incomplete evidence: the inadequacy of databases in tracing published adverse drug reactions in clinical trials110 cited

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

  • 2003Balancing benefits and harms in health care104 cited
  • 2001Assessment of therapeutic safety in systematic reviews: literature review94 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2021Cannabis in the management of PTSD: a systematic review77 cited
    • 2008Reporting of adverse events in systematic reviews can be improved: survey results64 cited
    • 2009Systematic reviews of adverse effects of drug interventions: a survey of their conduct and reporting quality54 cited
    • 2021Harms in Systematic Reviews Paper 2: Methods used to assess harms are neglected in systematic reviews of gabapentin34 cited
    • 2013Some improvements are apparent in identifying adverse effects in systematic reviews from 1994 to 201134 cited
    • 2009The Methods for the Synthesis of Studies without Control Groups32 cited
    • 2018The reporting of safety among drug systematic reviews was poor before the implementation of the PRISMA harms checklist23 cited
    • 2008Assessing Harms When Comparing Medical Interventions14 cited