SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
A methodological survey of the analysis, reporting and interpretation of Absolute Risk ReductiOn in systematic revieWs (ARROW): a study protocol
16 references·4 citing·50 second hop
A methodological survey of the analysis, reporting and interpretation of Absolute Risk ReductiOn in systematic revieWs (ARROW): a study protocol (2013)A methodological survey of the analysis, …Use of relative and absolute effect measures in reporting health inequalities: structured review (2012)Use of relative and absolute …Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: systematic review (2012)Credibility of claims of subg…Reporting of Effect Direction and Size in Abstracts of Systematic Reviews (2011)Reporting of Effect Direction…Stopping Randomized Trials Early for Benefit and Estimation of Treatment Effects Systematic Review and Meta-regression Analysis (2010)Stopping Randomized Trials Ea…Subgroup Analysis of Trials Is Rarely Easy (SATIRE): a study protocol for a systematic review to characterize the analysis, reporting, and claim of subgroup effects in randomized trials (2009)Subgroup Analysis of Trials I…LOST to follow-up Information in Trials (LOST-IT): a protocol on the potential impact (2009)LOST to follow-up Information…AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2009)AMSTAR is a reliable and vali…Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration (2008)Cochrane Handbook for Systema…Chapter 9: Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta-Analyses (2008)Chapter 9: Analysing Data and…Improving Depiction of Benefits and Harms (2007)Improving Depiction of Benefi…Ratio measures in leading medical journals: structured review of accessibility of underlying absolute risks (2006)Ratio measures in leading med…Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 1. Relative risk reduction, absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat (2004)Tips for learners of evidence…The effects of information framing on the practices of physicians (1999)The effects of information fr…Numbers needed to treat derived from meta-analyses---sometimes informative, usually misleading (1999)Numbers needed to treat deriv…An empirical study of the effect of the control rate as a predictor of treatment efficacy in meta-analysis of clinical trials (1998)An empirical study of the eff…The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)The Measurement of Observer A…Agreement in reporting between trial publications and current clinical trial registry in high impact journals: A methodological review (2017)Agreement in reporting betwee…Strategies to improve the credibility of meta-analyses in spine surgery: a systematic survey (2015)Strategies to improve the cre…Impact of missing participant data for dichotomous outcomes on pooled effect estimates in systematic reviews: a protocol for a methodological study (2014)Impact of missing participant…Effect of standardized training on the reliability of the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool: a study protocol (2014)Effect of standardized traini…An Assessment of Clinically Useful Measures of the Consequences of Treatment (1988)Review papers : The statistical basis of meta-analysis (1993)Meta-analysis: Principles and procedures (1997)Chapter 12: Interpreting results and drawing conclusions (2011)Pooling health‐related quality of life outcomes in meta‐analysis—a tutorial and review of methods for enhancing interpretability (2011)The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis (2018)A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales (1960)Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. (1968)STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT (1986)Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions (2011)Risks of all-cause and suicide mortality in mental disorders: a meta-review (2014)Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews (2014)Meta-analysis in clinical trials (1986)QUANTITATIVE METHODS IN THE REVIEW OF EPIDEMIOLOGIC LITERATURE1 (1987)Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement (1996)Investigating causes of heterogeneity in systematic reviews (2002)Language of publication restrictions in systematic reviews gave different results depending on whether the intervention was conventional or complementary (2005)Investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews: a methodologic review of guidance in the literature (2012)Measures of Association (1983)Empirical Evidence of Design-Related Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Tests (1999)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 2. Measures of precision (confidence intervals) (2004)Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 4. Assessing heterogeneity of primary studies in systematic reviews and whether to combine their results (2005)Is there a bi-directional relationship between depression and obesity among adult men and women? Systematic review and bias-adjusted meta analysis (2016)Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration (2007)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomized Trials (2010)The impact of NHS resource allocation policy on health inequalities in England 2001-11: longitudinal ecological study (2014)The Health Effects of Income Inequality: Averages and Disparities (2015)Gender differences in grant and personnel award funding rates at the Canadian Institutes of Health Research based on research content area: A retrospective analysis (2019)Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses (2010)Extending the PRISMA statement to equity-focused systematic reviews (PRISMA-E 2012): explanation and elaboration (2015)Integrated primary care for patients with mental and physical multimorbidity: cluster randomised controlled trial of collaborative care for patients with depression comorbid with diabetes or cardiovascular disease (2015)The lack of statistical power of subgroup analyses in meta-analyses: a cautionary note (2021)Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results (2009)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)Empirical Evidence of Study Design Biases in Randomized Trials: Systematic Review of Meta-Epidemiological Studies (2016)Evaluation of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized clinical trials: overview of published comments and analysis of user practice in Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews (2016)Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. (1994)Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL): Initial Reliability and Validity Data (1997)The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. (1998)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement (2015)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)Collaborative care for depression and anxiety problems (2012)Basics of meta‐analysis: I 2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity (2017)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2020)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency (2014)Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range (2014)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 1977The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data81,000 cited
  • 2008Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration5,525 cited
  • 2008Chapter 9: Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta-Analyses2,780 cited
  • 2009AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews1,756 cited
  • 2010Stopping Randomized Trials Early for Benefit and Estimation of Treatment Effects Systematic Review and Meta-regression Analysis613 cited
  • 2012Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: systematic review395 cited
  • 1999Numbers needed to treat derived from meta-analyses---sometimes informative, usually misleading301 cited
  • 2012Use of relative and absolute effect measures in reporting health inequalities: structured review249 cited
  • 1998An empirical study of the effect of the control rate as a predictor of treatment efficacy in meta-analysis of clinical trials217 cited
  • 2004Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 1. Relative risk reduction, absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat202 cited
  • 2006Ratio measures in leading medical journals: structured review of accessibility of underlying absolute risks142 cited
  • 1999The effects of information framing on the practices of physicians124 cited
  • 2009LOST to follow-up Information in Trials (LOST-IT): a protocol on the potential impact

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

90 cited
  • 2007Improving Depiction of Benefits and Harms74 cited
  • 2009Subgroup Analysis of Trials Is Rarely Easy (SATIRE): a study protocol for a systematic review to characterize the analysis, reporting, and claim of subgroup effects in randomized trials60 cited
  • 2011Reporting of Effect Direction and Size in Abstracts of Systematic Reviews43 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2017Agreement in reporting between trial publications and current clinical trial registry in high impact journals: A methodological review18 cited
    • 2015Strategies to improve the credibility of meta-analyses in spine surgery: a systematic survey18 cited
    • 2014Impact of missing participant data for dichotomous outcomes on pooled effect estimates in systematic reviews: a protocol for a methodological study14 cited
    • 2014Effect of standardized training on the reliability of the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool: a study protocol13 cited