SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Systematic Reviews in Sports Medicine
9 references·6 citing·39 second hop
Systematic Reviews in Sports Medicine (2015)Systematic Reviews in Sports MedicineMethodological quality of systematic reviews on influenza vaccination (2014)Methodological quality of sys…The Quality of Systematic Reviews in Hand Surgery (2013)The Quality of Systematic Rev…Systematic reviews supporting practice guideline recommendations lack protection against bias (2013)Systematic reviews supporting…Reporting and Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews in the Orthopaedic Literature (2013)Reporting and Methodological …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…How to Write a Systematic Review (2007)How to Write a Systematic Rev…Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2007)Development of AMSTAR: a meas…Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Improving the quality of repo…Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews (1994)Systematic Reviews: Rationale…Trends in Level of Evidence of Systematic Reviews in Sports Medicine, 2010-2020 : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (2022)Trends in Level of Evidence o…Declining Quality of Systematic Reviews in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine: An Updated Systematic Review (2022)Declining Quality of Systemat…Nearly One‐Third of Published Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses Yield Inconclusive Conclusions: A Systematic Review (2021)Nearly One‐Third of Published…Do we really need another systematic review? (2018)Do we really need another sys…Are Orthopaedic Systematic Reviews Overly Prevalent? (2016)Are Orthopaedic Systematic Re…Systematic review hacks for the sports and exercise clinician: five essential methodological elements (2015)Systematic review hacks for t…Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research (1976)Summing up: The Science of Reviewing Research (1987)A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction (1992)Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews (2008)Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews (2014)Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses (2019)Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias (2008)AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2009)Editorial: Methodology and reporting of meta-analyses in the neurosurgical literature (2014)Characteristics and Methodological Quality of Meta‐Analyses on Hypertension Treatments—A Cross‐Sectional Study (2016)Quality assessment of systematic reviews on total hip or knee arthroplasty using mod-AMSTAR (2018)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)How to Write a Systematic Review (2013)Smartphones for Smarter Delivery of Mental Health Programs: A Systematic Review (2013)A systematic review of gamification in e-Health (2017)Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)Impact of librarians on reporting of the literature searching component of pediatric systematic reviews (2016)Reproducibility of Search Strategies Is Poor in Systematic Reviews Published in High-Impact Pediatrics, Cardiology and Surgery Journals: A Cross-Sectional Study (2016)Reproducible research practices are underused in systematic reviews of biomedical interventions (2017)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)Reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation issues (SPIN) in abstracts of orthodontic meta-analyses published from 2000 to 2020 (2021)Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews (2023)Citation Contamination by Paper Mill Articles in Systematic Reviews of the Life Sciences (2025)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)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)Summarizing systematic reviews (2015)Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS) (2016)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Influence of Reported Study Design Characteristics on Intervention Effect Estimates From Randomized, Controlled Trials (2012)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Discrepancies in Outcome Reporting Exist Between Protocols and Published Oral Health Cochrane Systematic Reviews (2015)Methodological quality assessment of paper-based systematic reviews published in oral health (2015)Impact of heterogeneity and effect size on the estimation of the optimal information size: analysis of recently published meta-analyses (2017)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2009The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration28,094 cited
  • 1999Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement4,828 cited
  • 2007Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews4,376 cited
  • 1994Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews1,677 cited
  • 2007How to Write a Systematic Review606 cited
  • 2013Reporting and Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews in the Orthopaedic Literature112 cited
  • 2014Methodological quality of systematic reviews on influenza vaccination40 cited
  • 2013Systematic reviews supporting practice guideline recommendations lack protection against bias26 cited
  • 2013The Quality of Systematic Reviews in Hand Surgery24 cited

Cited by

  • 2015Systematic review hacks for the sports and exercise clinician: five essential methodological elements19 cited
  • 2021Nearly One‐Third of Published Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses Yield Inconclusive Conclusions: A Systematic Review17 cited
  • 2018Do we really need another systematic review?17 cited
  • 2016Are Orthopaedic Systematic Reviews Overly Prevalent?15 cited
  • 2022Declining Quality of Systematic Reviews in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine: An Updated Systematic Review

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

14 cited
  • 2022Trends in Level of Evidence of Systematic Reviews in Sports Medicine, 2010-2020 : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis13 cited