References

• 2009The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration28,094 cited
• 2009The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration10,345 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
• 1998Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?3,560 cited
• 2002How should meta‐regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted?3,021 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
• 2003Updated Method Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group2,179 cited
• 1999The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis1,981 cited
• 1997Health and Welfare during Industrialization657 cited
• 2006Development and validation of MIX: comprehensive free software for meta-analysis of causal research data514 cited
• 1987The Height and Weight of West Point Cadets: Dietary Change in Antebellum America