Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

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

Does a "Level I Evidence" rating imply high quality of reporting in orthopaedic randomised controlled trials?

16 references·16 citing·37 second hopsampled

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

References

1977The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data81,000 cited
1995Empirical Evidence of Bias5,632 cited
1995Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials5,560 cited
1998Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?3,560 cited
1999The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis1,981 cited
1995Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: An annotated bibliography of scales and checklists1,306 cited
2003INTRODUCING LEVELS OF EVIDENCE TO THE JOURNAL1,298 cited
2001Use of the CONSORT Statement and Quality of Reports of Randomized Trials1,026 cited
1998Methodology and Reports of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses534 cited
1997Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors358 cited
1997Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals342 cited
2002THE QUALITY OF REPORTING OF RANDOMIZED TRIALS IN THE JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY FROM 1988 THROUGH 2000243 cited
2005Assessment of methodological quality of primary studies by systematic reviews: results of the metaquality cross sectional study239 cited
2004

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

An observational study found that authors of randomized controlled trials frequently use concealment of randomization and blinding, despite the failure to report these methods

209 cited

2001Meta-Analyses in Orthopaedic Surgery190 cited

2004Interobserver Agreement in the Application of Levels of Evidence to Scientific Papers in the American Volume of The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery100 cited

Cited by

2021Psychosocial interventions on psychological outcomes of parents with perinatal loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis91 cited
2013Risk of bias of randomized controlled trials published in orthopaedic journals83 cited
2015Randomized controlled trials and neurosurgery: the ideal fit or should alternative methodologies be considered?83 cited
2013An assessment of the quality of rotator cuff randomized controlled trials: utilizing the Jadad score and CONSORT criteria77 cited
2018An Evaluation of Reporting Guidelines and Clinical Trial Registry Requirements Among Orthopaedic Surgery Journals64 cited
2021Systematic review and meta-analyses of studies analysing instructions to authors from 1987 to 201753 cited
2013Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials published in Intensive Care Medicine from 2001 to 201043 cited
2012Level of Evidence of Presentations at American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Annual Meetings39 cited
2008How good is the orthopaedic literature?33 cited
2014Current Status of Evidence‐Based Sports Medicine33 cited
2011The Levels of Evidence in Pediatric Orthopaedic Journals32 cited
2013What Are the Levels of Evidence on Which We Base Decisions for Surgical Management of Lower Extremity Bone Tumors?26 cited
2010Methods for the Systematic Reviews on Patient Safety During Spine Surgery26 cited
2009Levels of Evidence at the AAOS Meeting: Can Authors Rate Their Own Submissions, and Do Other Raters Agree?26 cited
2008Management of Confounding in Controlled Orthopaedic Trials26 cited
2012Randomized Trials in Surgery: How Far Have We Come?20 cited