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 Statement19,577 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
• 2019The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis4,525 cited
• 2000Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research Designs3,561 cited
• 1998Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?3,560 cited
• 2010Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care3,245 cited
• 2008Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study2,534 cited
• 2001Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses2,285 cited
• 2004Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons2,168 cited
• 2010Robust variance estimation in meta‐regression with dependent effect size estimates2,081 cited