SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
PEDro scale can only rate what papers report
4 references·0 citing·22 second hop
PEDro scale can only rate what papers report (2008)PEDro scale can only rate what papers rep…Reporting Randomized, Controlled Trials of Herbal Interventions: An Elaborated CONSORT Statement (2006)Reporting Randomized, Control…Reliability of the PEDro Scale for Rating Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials (2003)Reliability of the PEDro Scal…The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration (2001)The Revised CONSORT Statement…Physician Interpretations and Textbook Definitions of Blinding Terminology in Randomized Controlled Trials (2001)Physician Interpretations and…Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement (1996)Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? (1998)THE QUALITY OF REPORTING OF RANDOMIZED TRIALS IN THE JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY FROM 1988 THROUGH 2000 (2002)Turning a blind eye: the success of blinding reported in a random sample of randomised, placebo controlled trials (2004)The quality of randomized trial reporting in leading medical journals since the revised CONSORT statement (2005)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)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials (2001)The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials (2001)Methods and Processes of the CONSORT Group: Example of an Extension for Trials Assessing Nonpharmacologic Treatments (2008)CONSORT 2010 Statement (2010)Reporting guidelines for clinical trial reports for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the CONSORT-AI extension (2020)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)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)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2003Reliability of the PEDro Scale for Rating Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials4,799 cited
  • 2001The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration3,828 cited
  • 2006Reporting Randomized, Controlled Trials of Herbal Interventions: An Elaborated CONSORT Statement606 cited
  • 2001Physician Interpretations and Textbook Definitions of Blinding Terminology in Randomized Controlled Trials256 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

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