SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Reporting of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials with a focus on drug safety: An empirical assessment
7 references·5 citing·44 second hop
Reporting of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials with a focus on drug safety: An empirical assessment (2013)Reporting of meta-analyses of randomized …Meta-analysis of incidence of rare events (2012)Meta-analysis of incidence of…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 Repo…Risk of suicidality in clinical trials of antidepressants in adults: analysis of proprietary data submitted to US Food and Drug Administration (2009)Risk of suicidality in clinic…Reporting of Safety Results in Published Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials (2009)Reporting of Safety Results i…The strengths and limitations of meta-analyses based on aggregate data (2005)The strengths and limitations…Better Reporting of Harms in Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement (2004)Better Reporting of Harms in …Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Improving the quality of repo…Systematic review and meta-analysis: a critical examination of the methodology (2023)Systematic review and meta-an…Conducting separate reviews of benefits and harms could improve systematic reviews and meta-analyses (2023)Conducting separate reviews o…Biases in reporting of adverse effects in clinical trials, and potential impact on safety assessments in systematic reviews and therapy guidelines (2022)Biases in reporting of advers…Seeking adverse effects in systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions: protocol for a cross-sectional study (2019)Seeking adverse effects in sy…An appraisal of meta‐analysis guidelines: how do they relate to safety outcomes? (2016)An appraisal of meta‐analysis…Reporting results of cancer treatment (1981)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials (2001)The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration (2001)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement (2007)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)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)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)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis (2002)What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta‐analysis of sparse data (2004)Much ado about nothing: a comparison of the performance of meta‐analytical methods with rare events (2006)Suicides and Suicide Attempts during Long-Term Treatment with Antidepressants: A Meta-Analysis of 29 Placebo-Controlled Studies Including 6,934 Patients with Major Depressive Disorder (2016)Strategies to prevent death by suicide: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (2017)Real-world Performance of Meta-analysis Methods for Double-Zero-Event Studies with Dichotomous Outcomes Using the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2019)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)Reporting of Adverse Events in Published and Unpublished Studies of Health Care Interventions: A Systematic Review (2016)Preferred reporting items for overviews of systematic reviews including harms checklist: a pilot tool to be used for balanced reporting of benefits and harms (2017)CONSORT Harms 2022 statement, explanation, and elaboration: updated guideline for the reporting of harms in randomised trials (2023)Meta-analysis of the literature or of individual patient data: is there a difference? (1993)Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints (1998)To IPD or not to IPD? (2002)Evidence-Based Medicine, Systematic Reviews, and Guidelines in Interventional Pain Management: Part 6. Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies (2008)Evidence-Based Medicine, Systematic Reviews, and Guidelines in Interventional Pain Management: Part 3: Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Randomized Trials (2009)Dose-response meta-analysis of differences in means (2016)Methods for Meta-Analysis in Medical Research (2000)Suicidality in Pediatric Patients Treated With Antidepressant Drugs (2006)Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA): Classification of Suicidal Events in the FDA’s Pediatric Suicidal Risk Analysis of Antidepressants (2007)Suicide in Older Adults (2011)The European Psychiatric Association (EPA) guidance on suicide treatment and prevention (2011)Improving Suicide Prevention Through Evidence-Based Strategies: A Systematic Review (2021)Introduction to Meta‐Analysis (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)Bivariate beta-binomial model using Gaussian copula for bivariate meta-analysis of two binary outcomes with low incidence (2019)Enhancing search strategies for systematic reviews on drug Harms: An evaluation of the utility of ChatGPT in error detection and keyword generation (2025)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) (2011)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2020)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2009The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration10,345 cited
  • 1999Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement4,828 cited
  • 2004Better Reporting of Harms in Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement1,588 cited
  • 2009Risk of suicidality in clinical trials of antidepressants in adults: analysis of proprietary data submitted to US Food and Drug Administration608 cited
  • 2009Reporting of Safety Results in Published Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials285 cited
  • 2005The strengths and limitations of meta-analyses based on aggregate data250 cited
  • 2012Meta-analysis of incidence of rare events98 cited

Cited by

  • 2022Biases in reporting of adverse effects in clinical trials, and potential impact on safety assessments in systematic reviews and therapy guidelines21 cited
  • 2016An appraisal of meta‐analysis guidelines: how do they relate to safety outcomes?15 cited
  • 2019Seeking adverse effects in systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions: protocol for a cross-sectional study11 cited
  • 2023Conducting separate reviews of benefits and harms could improve systematic reviews and meta-analyses11 cited
  • 2023Systematic review and meta-analysis: a critical examination of the methodology7 cited

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