References

• 1960A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales42,335 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
• 1996Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement3,337 cited
• 1996Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials3,126 cited
• 2001Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses2,285 cited
• 1998The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials769 cited
• 1996The CONSORT Statement736 cited
• 2002Correlation of Quality Measures With Estimates of Treatment Effect in Meta-analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials473 cited
• 2007Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials470 cited
• 2006Estimates of Quality and Reliability With the Physiotherapy Evidence-Based Database Scale to Assess the Methodology of Randomized Controlled Trials of Pharmacological and Nonpharmacological Interventions231 cited
• 2004An observational study found that authors of randomized controlled trials frequently use concealment of randomization and blinding, despite the failure to report these methods