this work references cited by second hopReferences
- 1995Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials5,560 cited
- 2001The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials5,372 cited
- 1998Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?3,560 cited
- 1996Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement3,337 cited
- 2001Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials3,309 cited
- 2001Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses2,285 cited
- 2001The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials1,426 cited
- 1981A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial1,349 cited
- 1995Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: An annotated bibliography of scales and checklists1,306 cited
- 2001Use of the CONSORT Statement and Quality of Reports of Randomized Trials1,026 cited
- 2002Correlation of Quality Measures With Estimates of Treatment Effect in Meta-analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials473 cited
- 1996Assessing the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials:Current Issues and Future Directions436 cited
- 2001Physician Interpretations and Textbook Definitions of Blinding Terminology in Randomized Controlled Trials
Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work