Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

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

Quality appraisal in systematic reviews of public health interventions: an empirical study on the impact of choice of tool on meta-analysis

15 references·11 citing·41 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

2007The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies17,756 cited
2008The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies17,743 cited
2014The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses17,633 cited
2010CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials13,365 cited
2001Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials3,309 cited
2003Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies2,905 cited
2004Improving the Reporting Quality of Nonrandomized Evaluations of Behavioral and Public Health Interventions: The TREND Statement2,804 cited
2007The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies2,698 cited
2007Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography1,532 cited
2010CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials1,019 cited
1986The Integrative Research Review: A Systematic Approach537 cited
2004A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools390 cited
2004Use of research to inform public policymaking

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

307 cited

2005Systematic reviews of health effects of social interventions: 2. Best available evidence: how low should you go?167 cited

2003New Roads and Human Health: A Systematic Review94 cited

Cited by

2019Considerations of complexity in rating certainty of evidence in systematic reviews: a primer on using the GRADE approach in global health68 cited
2018Applying the ROBINS-I tool to natural experiments: an example from public health60 cited
2019A unified framework for bias assessment in clinical research41 cited
2014Evidence-based decision-making in infectious diseases epidemiology, prevention and control: matching research questions to study designs and quality appraisal tools23 cited
2020Gender, Power, and Health: Measuring and Assessing Sexual Relationship Power Equity Among Young Sub-Saharan African Women and Men, a Systematic Review23 cited
2014Impact of choice of quality appraisal tool for systematic reviews in overviews19 cited
2022The Teaching and Learning Toolkit: Communicating research evidence to inform decision‐making for policy and practice in education16 cited
2025Risk of bias assessment tools often addressed items not related to risk of bias and used numerical scores14 cited
2016Evaluating Approaches to Quality Assessment in Library and Information Science LIS Systematic Reviews: A Methodology Review12 cited
2021Assessments of risk of bias in systematic reviews of observational nutritional epidemiologic studies are often not appropriate or comprehensive: a methodological study11 cited
2023Consideration of overadjustment bias in guidelines and tools for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies is long overdue11 cited