Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Disagreements in meta-analyses using outcomes measured on continuous or rating scales: observer agreement study

12 references·16 citing·37 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement83,813 cited
2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.44,857 cited
2009Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement37,549 cited
2008Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions25,045 cited
2020Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions5,670 cited
2001The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials5,372 cited
2004Empirical Evidence for Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized Trials1,845 cited
2001The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials1,426 cited
2006Single data extraction generated more errors than double data extraction in systematic reviews462 cited
2007Data Extraction Errors in Meta-analyses That Use Standardized Mean Differences237 cited
2005The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials 2001198 cited
2005High prevalence but low impact of data extraction and reporting errors were found in Cochrane systematic reviews114 cited

Cited by

2011Arguments for and Against Standardized Mean Differences (Effect Sizes)

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

73 cited

2020Future of evidence ecosystem series: 1. Introduction Evidence synthesis ecosystem needs dramatic change66 cited

2021A meta-review of transparency and reproducibility-related reporting practices in published meta-analyses on clinical psychological interventions (2000–2020)63 cited

2011Multiplicity of data in trial reports and the reliability of meta-analyses: empirical study60 cited

2018Meta‐analysis: Key features, potentials and misunderstandings56 cited

2021The REPRISE project: protocol for an evaluation of REProducibility and Replicability In Syntheses of Evidence55 cited

2022Large variation existed in standardized mean difference estimates using different calculation methods in clinical trials31 cited

2015Discrepancies in Outcome Reporting Exist Between Protocols and Published Oral Health Cochrane Systematic Reviews30 cited

2012Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions30 cited

2024Comparisons of the mean differences and standardized mean differences for continuous outcome measures on the same scale28 cited

2020Adjudication rather than experience of data abstraction matters more in reducing errors in abstracting data in systematic reviews26 cited

2017A low proportion of systematic reviews in physical therapy are registered: a survey of 150 published systematic reviews25 cited

2015Methods to select results to include in meta-analyses deserve more consideration in systematic reviews22 cited

2024Yet another problem with systematic reviews: a living review update20 cited

2026Large language models show promising performance for some systematic review tasks but call for cautious implementation: a systematic review18 cited

2024Identification of application and interpretation errors that can occur in pairwise meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: a systematic review16 cited