SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating Cochrane reviews
16 references·0 citing·30 second hop
Considerations from the risk of bias perspective for updating Cochrane reviews (2015)Considerations from the risk of bias pers…Evaluation of the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials: focus groups, online survey, proposed recommendations and their implementation (2014)Evaluation of the Cochrane Co…Empty Reviews: A Description and Consideration of Cochrane Systematic Reviews with No Included Studies (2012)Empty Reviews: A Description …Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration (2011)Cochrane handbook for systema…Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)Preferred reporting items for…Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for…Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for…Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for…When and how to update systematic reviews (2008)When and how to update system…Presenting Results and ‘Summary of Findings’ Tables (2008)Presenting Results and ‘Summa…Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Cochrane Handbook for Systema…Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies (2008)Chapter 8: Assessing risk of …Empty systematic reviews: hidden perils and lessons learned (2007)Empty systematic reviews: hid…Who is blinded in randomized clinical trials? A study of 200 trials and a survey of authors (2006)Who is blinded in randomized …Systematic reviews: when is an update an update? (2006)Systematic reviews: when is a…Investing in updating: how do conclusions change when Cochrane systematic reviews are updated? (2005)Investing in updating: how do…Clinical Trial Registration: A Statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2004)Clinical Trial Registration: …Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses (2014)The risk of bias in observational studies of exposures (ROBINS-E) tool: concerns arising from application to observational studies of exposures (2018)Classical psychedelics for the treatment of depression and anxiety: A systematic review (2019)Using Risk of Bias 2 to assess results from randomised controlled trials: guidance from Cochrane (2023)Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines (2010)RAPID REVIEW: AN EMERGING APPROACH TO EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (2014)Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 5: methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews (2017)Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis: A Step-by-Step Approach (2017)Using artificial intelligence methods for systematic review in health sciences: A systematic review (2022)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies (2007)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement (2015)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration (2007)The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration (2001)Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to Authors' (2008)The Commodification of Academic Research (2010)Best Practice in Systematic Reviews: The Importance of Protocols and Registration (2011)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Behavioral Interventions for Pediatric Insomnia (2014)Dealing with missing standard deviation and mean values in meta-analysis of continuous outcomes: a systematic review (2018)Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements (2019)
this work references cited by second hop

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 Statement63,979 cited
  • 2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.44,857 cited
  • 2008Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions25,045 cited
  • 2009Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement19,577 cited
  • 2008Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies3,791 cited
  • 2011Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration810 cited
  • 2014Evaluation of the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials: focus groups, online survey, proposed recommendations and their implementation340 cited
  • 2004Clinical Trial Registration: A Statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors264 cited
  • 2012Empty Reviews: A Description and Consideration of Cochrane Systematic Reviews with No Included Studies220 cited
  • 2008Presenting Results and ‘Summary of Findings’ Tables206 cited
  • 2008When and how to update systematic reviews151 cited
  • 2006Who is blinded in randomized clinical trials? A study of 200 trials and a survey of authors150 cited

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

2007
Empty systematic reviews: hidden perils and lessons learned
115 cited
  • 2006Systematic reviews: when is an update an update?110 cited
  • 2005Investing in updating: how do conclusions change when Cochrane systematic reviews are updated?60 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.