SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Systematic reviews of adverse effects: framework for a structured approach
6 references·16 citing·52 second hop
Systematic reviews of adverse effects: framework for a structured approach (2007)Systematic reviews of adverse effects: fr…The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses (2014)The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (N…The Cochrane Library (2005)The Cochrane LibraryBetter Reporting of Harms in Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement (2004)Better Reporting of Harms in …Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)Evaluating non-randomised int…Completeness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas. (2001)Completeness of safety report…Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials (2001)Assessing the quality of cont…Adverse events in clinical treatments with serotonergic psychedelics and MDMA: A mixed-methods systematic review (2022)Adverse events in clinical tr…A Protocol for the Use of Case Reports/Studies and Case Series in Systematic Reviews for Clinical Toxicology (2021)A Protocol for the Use of Cas…Digital Behavior Change Interventions for Younger Children With Chronic Health Conditions: Systematic Review (2020)Digital Behavior Change Inter…Adverse events in meditation practices and meditation‐based therapies: a systematic review (2020)Adverse events in meditation …Evaluating unintended consequences: New insights into solving practical, ethical and political challenges of evaluation (2019)Evaluating unintended consequ…A new risk of bias checklist applicable to randomized trials, observational studies, and systematic reviews was developed and validated to be used for systematic reviews focusing on drug adverse events (2017)A new risk of bias checklist …Conceptos fundamentales de las revisiones sistemáticas/metaanálisis (2015)Conceptos fundamentales de la…Quality of reporting in systematic reviews of adverse events: systematic review (2014)Quality of reporting in syste…Investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews: a methodologic review of guidance in the literature (2012)Investigating clinical hetero…Finding evidence for comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program (2011)Finding evidence for comparin…Comprehensive evaluations of the adverse effects of drugs: importance of appropriate study selection and data sources (2011)Comprehensive evaluations of …Complementary medicine and safety: A systematic investigation of design and reporting of systematic reviews (2011)Complementary medicine and sa…A review of safety, side-effects and subjective reactions to intranasal oxytocin in human research (2011)A review of safety, side-effe…Systematic reviews of adverse effects of drug interventions: a survey of their conduct and reporting quality (2009)Systematic reviews of adverse…Search strategies to identify information on adverse effects: a systematic review (2009)Search strategies to identify…AHRQ Series Paper 4: Assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program (2008)AHRQ Series Paper 4: Assessin…Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (1963)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care (2010)GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) (2011)Assessing risk of bias in prevalence studies: modification of an existing tool and evidence of interrater agreement (2012)Reporting results of cancer treatment (1981)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials (2001)The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration (2001)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement (2007)CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)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)Consensus-based recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews (2013)Psychological distress among healthcare providers during COVID-19 in Asia: Systematic review and meta-analysis (2021)JBI series paper 2: tailored evidence synthesis approaches are required to answer diverse questions: a pragmatic evidence synthesis toolkit from JBI (2022)Cumulative Meta-Analysis of Therapeutic Trials for Myocardial Infarction (1992)Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement (1996)Meta-Analysis, Decision Analysis, and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (1999)Reporting bias in medical research - a narrative review (2010)PRISMA harms checklist: improving harms reporting in systematic reviews (2016)Assessing the Risk of Bias of Individual Studies in Systematic Reviews of Health Care Interventions (2017)Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? (1998)The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials (2001)The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews (2003)Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews (2008)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. (1988)Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. (1988)Oxytocin increases trust in humans (2005)Breaking the loop: Oxytocin as a potential treatment for drug addiction (2011)Prosocial effects of oxytocin and clinical evidence for its therapeutic potential (2011)Cultural Neuroscience: Biology of the Mind in Cultural Contexts (2013)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)Selective reporting bias of harm outcomes within studies: findings from a cohort of systematic reviews (2014)Harms Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions Aimed at Modifying Microbiota (2018)Attention regulation and monitoring in meditation (2008)Meditation Programs for Psychological Stress and Well-being (2014)Mind the Hype: A Critical Evaluation and Prescriptive Agenda for Research on Mindfulness and Meditation (2017)Attitudes and Beliefs about the Therapeutic Use of Psychedelic Drugs among Psychologists in the United States (2021)Prevalence of meditation-related adverse effects in a population-based sample in the United States (2021)Neurobiological Changes Induced by Mindfulness and Meditation: A Systematic Review (2024)Imputing missing standard deviations in meta-analyses can provide accurate results (2005)Understanding participation in sport and physical activity among children and adults: a review of qualitative studies (2006)Trial sequential analysis reveals insufficient information size and potentially false positive results in many meta-analyses (2008)Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide (2006)Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses (2010)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2014The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses17,633 cited
  • 2001Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials3,309 cited
  • 2003Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies2,905 cited
  • 2005The Cochrane Library2,035 cited
  • 2004Better Reporting of Harms in Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement1,588 cited
  • 2001Completeness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas.564 cited

Cited by

  • 2011A review of safety, side-effects and subjective reactions to intranasal oxytocin in human research347 cited
  • 2020Adverse events in meditation practices and meditation‐based therapies: a systematic review262 cited
  • 2012Investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews: a methodologic review of guidance in the literature222 cited
  • 2014Quality of reporting in systematic reviews of adverse events: systematic review218 cited
  • 2008AHRQ Series Paper 4: Assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program184 cited
  • 2022Adverse events in clinical treatments with serotonergic psychedelics and MDMA: A mixed-methods systematic review177 cited
  • 2020Digital Behavior Change Interventions for Younger Children With Chronic Health Conditions: Systematic Review63 cited

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

2021
A Protocol for the Use of Case Reports/Studies and Case Series in Systematic Reviews for Clinical Toxicology
54 cited
  • 2009Systematic reviews of adverse effects of drug interventions: a survey of their conduct and reporting quality54 cited
  • 2011Finding evidence for comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program52 cited
  • 2019Evaluating unintended consequences: New insights into solving practical, ethical and political challenges of evaluation51 cited
  • 2011Comprehensive evaluations of the adverse effects of drugs: importance of appropriate study selection and data sources49 cited
  • 2017A new risk of bias checklist applicable to randomized trials, observational studies, and systematic reviews was developed and validated to be used for systematic reviews focusing on drug adverse events45 cited
  • 2009Search strategies to identify information on adverse effects: a systematic review42 cited
  • 2015Conceptos fundamentales de las revisiones sistemáticas/metaanálisis40 cited
  • 2011Complementary medicine and safety: A systematic investigation of design and reporting of systematic reviews34 cited