SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Relative vs. absolute measures of benefit and risk: what’s the difference?
1 references·6 citing·29 second hop
Relative vs. absolute measures of benefit and risk: what’s the difference? (2009)Relative vs. absolute measures of benefit…Down with odds ratios! (1996)Down with odds ratios!Income in epidemiological research: a guide to measurement and analytical treatment with a case study on mental disorders and mortality (2025)Income in epidemiological res…Opportunities for prevention: a data-linkage study to inform a public health response to youth offending in the Northern Territory, Australia (2021)Opportunities for prevention:…Outcome measures reported in abstracts of randomized controlled trials in leading clinical journals: A bibliometric study (2020)Outcome measures reported in …Number needed to treat (NNT) in clinical literature: an appraisal (2017)Number needed to treat (NNT) …Authors seldom report the most patient-important outcomes and absolute effect measures in systematic review abstracts (2016)Authors seldom report the mos…Balancing benefit and risk of medicines: a systematic review and classification of available methodologies (2014)Balancing benefit and risk of…Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. (1994)Stated choice methods analysis and applications (2000)Stated Choice Methods (2000)Patient-Focused Benefit-Risk Analysis to Inform Regulatory Decisions: The European Union Perspective (2016)Factors and situations influencing the value of patient preference studies along the medical product lifecycle: a literature review (2018)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)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)Patient-important outcomes in systematic reviews: Poor quality of evidence (2018)Reporting Quality of Systematic Review Abstracts Published in Leading Neurosurgical Journals: A Research on Research Study (2018)Similarities, reliability and gaps in assessing the quality of conduct of systematic reviews using AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS: systematic survey of nutrition reviews (2021)The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration (2001)Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta‐Analyses (2008)CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Title, abstract, and keyword searching resulted in poor recovery of articles in systematic reviews of epidemiologic practice (2020)Safety planning-type interventions for suicide prevention: meta-analysis (2021)Research Review: The effect of school‐based suicide prevention on suicidal ideation and suicide attempts and the role of intervention and contextual factors among adolescents: a meta‐analysis and meta‐regression (2022)CONSORT for Reporting Randomized Controlled Trials in Journal and Conference Abstracts: Explanation and Elaboration (2008)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomized Trials (2010)Defining maltreatment according to substantiation: distinction without a difference? (2005)Time to Leave Substantiation Behind (2008)Development, Evaluation, and Multinational Dissemination of the Triple P-Positive Parenting Program (2012)Complex early childhood experiences: Characteristics of Northern Territory children across health, education and child protection data (2023)Indicators of socioeconomic position (part 1): Figure 1 (2005)Danish registers on personal income and transfer payments (2011)The Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register (2011)Statistical Methods for Examining Heterogeneity and Combining Results from Several Studies in Meta‐Analysis (2001)A modified test for small‐study effects in meta‐analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints (2005)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 1996Down with odds ratios!223 cited

Cited by

  • 2017Number needed to treat (NNT) in clinical literature: an appraisal173 cited
  • 2014Balancing benefit and risk of medicines: a systematic review and classification of available methodologies130 cited
  • 2016Authors seldom report the most patient-important outcomes and absolute effect measures in systematic review abstracts44 cited
  • 2025Income in epidemiological research: a guide to measurement and analytical treatment with a case study on mental disorders and mortality14 cited
  • 2021Opportunities for prevention: a data-linkage study to inform a public health response to youth offending in the Northern Territory, Australia13 cited
  • 2020Outcome measures reported in abstracts of randomized controlled trials in leading clinical journals: A bibliometric study5 cited

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