References

• 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
• 2001The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration3,828 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
• 1996Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials3,126 cited
• 2001Use of the CONSORT Statement and Quality of Reports of Randomized Trials1,026 cited
• 2006Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review873 cited
• 2002Quality of Reporting of Randomized Trials as a Measure of Methodologic Quality397 cited
• 2004Blinding was judged more difficult to achieve and maintain in nonpharmacologic than pharmacologic trials300 cited
• 2004An observational study found that authors of randomized controlled trials frequently use concealment of randomization and blinding, despite the failure to report these methods209 cited
• 2005Comparison of descriptions of allocation concealment in trial protocols and the published reports: cohort study209 cited
• 2002In the dark The reporting of blinding status in randomized controlled trials