SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Randomized trials published in higher vs. lower impact journals differ in design, conduct, and analysis
16 references·16 citing·32 second hopsampled
Randomized trials published in higher vs. lower impact journals differ in design, conduct, and analysis (2013)Randomized trials published in higher vs.…Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials (2011)Randomisation to protect agai…GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence (2011)GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating t…Comparisons of Citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for Articles Published in General Medical Journals (2009)Comparisons of Citations in W…Patient-Important Outcomes in Registered Diabetes Trials (2008)Patient-Important Outcomes in…Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study (2008)Empirical evidence of bias in…Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials (2007)Impact of allocation concealm…Characteristics Associated with Citation Rate of the Medical Literature (2007)Characteristics Associated wi…An observational study found that authors of randomized controlled trials frequently use concealment of randomization and blinding, despite the failure to report these methods (2004)An observational study found …How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study (2003)How important are comprehensi…Association of Journal Quality Indicators With Methodological Quality of Clinical Research Articles (2002)Association of Journal Qualit…Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses (2001)Reported Methodologic Quality…Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials (2001)Assessing the quality of cont…Location bias in controlled clinical trials of complementary/alternative therapies (2000)Location bias in controlled c…Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? (1998)Does quality of reports of ra…Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Empirical evidence of bias. D…Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Empirical Evidence of BiasStudy results from journals with a higher impact factor are closer to “truth”: a meta-epidemiological study (2023)Study results from journals w…Journal impact factor, trial effect size, and methodological quality appear scantly related: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2020)Journal impact factor, trial …Trends and predictors of biomedical research quality, 1990–2015: a meta-research study (2019)Trends and predictors of biom…The reporting of safety among drug systematic reviews was poor before the implementation of the PRISMA harms checklist (2018)The reporting of safety among…Making protocols available with the article improved evaluation of selective outcome reporting (2018)Making protocols available wi…Design, Conduct, and Analysis of Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials (2018)Design, Conduct, and Analysis…Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on psoriasis: role of funding sources, conflict of interest and bibliometric indices as predictors of methodological quality (2017)Systematic reviews and meta-a…Quality of missing data reporting and handling in palliative care trials demonstrates that further development of the CONSORT statement is required: a systematic review (2017)Quality of missing data repor…Examining How Treatment Fidelity Is Supported, Measured, and Reported in K–3 Reading Intervention Research (2017)Examining How Treatment Fidel…Quality of reporting in surgical randomized clinical trials (2016)Quality of reporting in surgi…Are dental researchers asking patient-important questions? A scoping review (2016)Are dental researchers asking…A Systematic Review of Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials (2016)A Systematic Review of Surgic…A quality assessment of randomized controlled trial reports in endodontics (2016)A quality assessment of rando…Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts (2015)Reporting quality of randomiz…Outcome Discrepancies and Selective Reporting: Impacting the Leading Journals? (2015)Outcome Discrepancies and Sel…Associated Factors and Consequences of Risk of Bias in Randomized Controlled Trials of Yoga: A Systematic Review (2015)Associated Factors and Conseq…The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. (1979)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)A Systematic Review of Risk Factors for Intimate Partner Violence (2012)Influence of Reported Study Design Characteristics on Intervention Effect Estimates From Randomized, Controlled Trials (2012)THE EFFECT OF ENGLISH-LANGUAGE RESTRICTION ON SYSTEMATIC REVIEW-BASED META-ANALYSES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF EMPIRICAL STUDIES (2012)Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses (2007)A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques (2017)Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases (2019)Application of bibliometrics in medicine: a historical bibliometrics analysis (2020)The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials (2001)The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews (2003)Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews (2008)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)Chapter 9: Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta-Analyses (2008)Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses (2019)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials (2001)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)Effectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials (2014)Association Between Risk-of-Bias Assessments and Results of Randomized Trials in Cochrane Reviews: The ROBES Meta-Epidemiologic Study (2017)Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies (2008)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care (2010)GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) (2011)GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency (2011)A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis (2014)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2021)CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)
this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

References

  • 2011GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence8,270 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
  • 2001Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials3,309 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
  • 2003How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study1,181 cited
  • 2009Comparisons of Citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for Articles Published in General Medical Journals819 cited
  • 2007Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials470 cited
  • 2011Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials439 cited
  • 2002Association of Journal Quality Indicators With Methodological Quality of Clinical Research Articles284 cited
  • 2008Patient-Important Outcomes in Registered Diabetes Trials252 cited

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

  • 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
  • 2000Location bias in controlled clinical trials of complementary/alternative therapies186 cited
  • 2007Characteristics Associated with Citation Rate of the Medical Literature165 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2016Are dental researchers asking patient-important questions? A scoping review84 cited
    • 2015Outcome Discrepancies and Selective Reporting: Impacting the Leading Journals?80 cited
    • 2017Examining How Treatment Fidelity Is Supported, Measured, and Reported in K–3 Reading Intervention Research52 cited
    • 2017Quality of missing data reporting and handling in palliative care trials demonstrates that further development of the CONSORT statement is required: a systematic review51 cited
    • 2015Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts47 cited
    • 2016A Systematic Review of Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials44 cited
    • 2016A quality assessment of randomized controlled trial reports in endodontics41 cited
    • 2017Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on psoriasis: role of funding sources, conflict of interest and bibliometric indices as predictors of methodological quality39 cited
    • 2020Journal impact factor, trial effect size, and methodological quality appear scantly related: a systematic review and meta-analysis39 cited
    • 2016Quality of reporting in surgical randomized clinical trials37 cited
    • 2018Design, Conduct, and Analysis of Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials28 cited
    • 2019Trends and predictors of biomedical research quality, 1990–2015: a meta-research study27 cited
    • 2015Associated Factors and Consequences of Risk of Bias in Randomized Controlled Trials of Yoga: A Systematic Review26 cited
    • 2018The reporting of safety among drug systematic reviews was poor before the implementation of the PRISMA harms checklist23 cited
    • 2018Making protocols available with the article improved evaluation of selective outcome reporting20 cited
    • 2023Study results from journals with a higher impact factor are closer to “truth”: a meta-epidemiological study18 cited