SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Issues affecting the level of prosthetics research evidence
16 references·0 citing·49 second hop
Issues affecting the level of prosthetics research evidence (2014)Issues affecting the level of prosthetics…Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide (2014)Better reporting of intervent…GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence (2011)GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating t…CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2011)CONSORT 2010 explanation and …The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)The PRISMA statement for repo…Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for…Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration (2007)Strengthening the Reporting o…Eligibility Criteria of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in High-Impact General Medical Journals (2007)Eligibility Criteria of Rando…Improving the Reporting Quality of Nonrandomized Evaluations of Behavioral and Public Health Interventions: The TREND Statement (2004)Improving the Reporting Quali…Reliability of the PEDro Scale for Rating Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials (2003)Reliability of the PEDro Scal…Evidence for physiotherapy practice: A survey of the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) (2002)Evidence for physiotherapy pr…Reliability: What is it, and how is it measured? (2000)Reliability: What is it, and …Measures of Reliability in Sports Medicine and Science (2000)Measures of Reliability in Sp…Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. (1999)Statistical methods in psycho…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…Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Clinical Decisions (1997)Systematic Reviews: Synthesis…Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews (1994)Systematic Reviews: Rationale…The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews (2016)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. (1979)STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT (1986)Statistical Methods For Assessing Measurement Error (Reliability) in Variables Relevant to Sports Medicine (1998)Smallest real difference, a link between reproducibility and responsiveness (2001)QUANTIFYING TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY USING THE INTRACLASS CORRELATION COEFFICIENT AND THE SEM (2005)A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research (2016)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials: a demographic study (2009)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)Design of Experiments (1936)The earth is round (p < .05). (1994)The Handbook of Research Synthesis. (1995)A Meta-Analysis of Response Rates in Web- or Internet-Based Surveys (2000)The empirical status of cognitive-behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses (2005)Eta squared and partial eta squared as measures of effect size in educational research (2011)Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (1963)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration (2001)A taxonomy of behavior change techniques used in interventions. (2008)A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research (2009)Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care (2010)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)Methodological index for non‐randomized studies ( MINORS ): development and validation of a new instrument (2003)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)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies (2007)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies (2007)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials (2016)CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials (2016)CARE guidelines for case reports: explanation and elaboration document (2017)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)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency (2011)A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis (2014)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2021)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2009Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement37,549 cited
  • 2009The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration10,571 cited
  • 2014Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide10,521 cited
  • 2007Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration8,588 cited
  • 2011GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence8,270 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
  • 2003Reliability of the PEDro Scale for Rating Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials4,799 cited
  • 2000Measures of Reliability in Sports Medicine and Science4,631 cited
  • 2004Improving the Reporting Quality of Nonrandomized Evaluations of Behavioral and Public Health Interventions: The TREND Statement2,804 cited
  • 1999Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.2,789 cited
  • 2011CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials2,342 cited
  • 1997Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Clinical Decisions2,184 cited
  • 1994Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews

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

1,677 cited
  • 2007Eligibility Criteria of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in High-Impact General Medical Journals1,056 cited
  • 2002Evidence for physiotherapy practice: A survey of the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro)910 cited
  • 2000Reliability: What is it, and how is it measured?749 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.