SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Systematic reviews and research waste
6 references·2 citing·37 second hop
Systematic reviews and research waste (2016)Systematic reviews and research wasteHow systematic reviews cause research waste (2015)How systematic reviews cause …Association Between Analytic Strategy and Estimates of Treatment Outcomes in Meta-analyses (2014)Association Between Analytic …A Systematic Examination of the Citation of Prior Research in Reports of Randomized, Controlled Trials (2011)A Systematic Examination of t…Clinical trials should begin and end with systematic reviews of relevant evidence: 12 years and waiting (2010)Clinical trials should begin …Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence (2009)Avoidable waste in the produc…Commentary: Which meta-analyses are conclusive? (2008)Commentary: Which meta-analys…Nearly One‐Third of Published Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses Yield Inconclusive Conclusions: A Systematic Review (2021)Nearly One‐Third of Published…Do we really need another systematic review? (2018)Do we really need another sys…Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials (1996)Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement (1996)Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews (2007)Evidence-Based Research Series-Paper 1: What Evidence-Based Research is and why is it important? (2020)SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials (2025)Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (2011)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)Meta-analysis as Evidence (2014)An algorithm was developed to assign GRADE levels of evidence to comparisons within systematic reviews (2015)Long-term efficacy of psychotherapy for posttraumatic stress disorder: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (2017)The Matthew Effect in Science, II: Cumulative Advantage and the Symbolism of Intellectual Property (1988)A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction (1992)The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration (2001)Tackling treatment uncertainties together: the evolution of the James LindInitiative, 2003–2013 (2013)Towards evidence based research (2016)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials (2001)Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis (2001)Trial sequential analyses of meta-analyses of complications in laparoscopic vs. small-incision cholecystectomy: more randomized patients are needed (2009)Trial sequential analysis may be insufficient to draw firm conclusions regarding statistically significant treatment differences using observed intervention effects: A case study of meta-analyses of multiple myeloma trials (2012)Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials–A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence (2022)How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study (2003)Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up? (2010)Study-based registers reduce waste in systematic reviewing: discussion and case report (2019)Evidence synthesis relevant to COVID-19: a protocol for multiple systematic reviews and overviews of systematic reviews (2020)A meta-analysis of technology use and cognitive aging (2025)ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed (2015)The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist (2016)Declining Quality of Systematic Reviews in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine: An Updated Systematic Review (2022)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 Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research (2014)CONSORT Statement for Randomized Trials of Nonpharmacologic Treatments: A 2017 Update and a CONSORT Extension for Nonpharmacologic Trial Abstracts (2017)The COMET Handbook: version 1.0 (2017)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2009Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence2,204 cited
  • 2014Association Between Analytic Strategy and Estimates of Treatment Outcomes in Meta-analyses233 cited
  • 2010Clinical trials should begin and end with systematic reviews of relevant evidence: 12 years and waiting166 cited
  • 2011A Systematic Examination of the Citation of Prior Research in Reports of Randomized, Controlled Trials151 cited
  • 2015How systematic reviews cause research waste83 cited
  • 2008Commentary: Which meta-analyses are conclusive?32 cited

Cited by

  • 2021Nearly One‐Third of Published Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses Yield Inconclusive Conclusions: A Systematic Review17 cited
  • 2018Do we really need another systematic review?17 cited

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