SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Quality appraisal as part of the systematic review: a review of current methods
8 references·0 citing·41 second hopsampled
Quality appraisal as part of the systematic review: a review of current methods (2010)Quality appraisal as part of the systemat…The Sensitivity of Review Results to Methods Used to Appraise and Incorporate Trial Quality Into Data Synthesis (2007)The Sensitivity of Review Res…Updated Method Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group (2003)Updated Method Guidelines for…Reliability of the PEDro Scale for Rating Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials (2003)Reliability of the PEDro Scal…Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses (2001)Reported Methodologic Quality…How to review the evidence: systematic identification and review of the scientific literature (2000)How to review the evidence: s…Discrepancies between Meta-Analyses and Subsequent Large Randomized, Controlled Trials (1997)Discrepancies between Meta-An…The Relationship Between Methodological Quality and Conclusions in Reviews of Spinal Manipulation (1995)The Relationship Between Meth…Best evidence synthesis: An intelligent alternative to meta-analysis (1995)Best evidence synthesis: An i…The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. (1979)Operating Characteristics of a Rank Correlation Test for Publication Bias (1994)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis (2002)Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: a critical appraisal of guidelines and practice (2002)Systems to rate the strength of scientific evidence. (2002)Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials (1987)Systematic Reviews: Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews (1994)Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: An annotated bibliography of scales and checklists (1995)Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (2008)2009 Updated Method Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group (2009)Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research (1976)Meta-analysis in social research (1982)Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research. (1994)Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide (2006)Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care (2010)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Scales to Assess the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review (2007)The Pittsburgh sleep quality index as a screening tool for sleep dysfunction in clinical and non-clinical samples: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2015)Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? (1998)Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials (2001)Disordered Eating, Menstrual Disturbances, and Low Bone Mineral Density in Dancers: A Systematic Review (2010)Synthesizing study results in a systematic review (2011)Systematic review of posttraumatic stress disorder in police officers following routine work‐related critical incident exposure (2020)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials: a demographic study (2009)The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta‐analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review (2015)Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better? (2020)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta‐Analyses (2008)Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies (2008)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Meta-analysis: Statistical alchemy for the 21st century (1995)Predictive ability of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (1995)Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis: Is there a tower of babel bias? (1995)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research Designs (2000)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)
this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

References

  • 2003Reliability of the PEDro Scale for Rating Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials4,799 cited
  • 2001Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses2,285 cited
  • 2003Updated Method Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group2,184 cited
  • 1997Discrepancies between Meta-Analyses and Subsequent Large Randomized, Controlled Trials1,170 cited
  • 1995Best evidence synthesis: An intelligent alternative to meta-analysis950 cited
  • 2000How to review the evidence: systematic identification and review of the scientific literature268 cited
  • 1995The Relationship Between Methodological Quality and Conclusions in Reviews of Spinal Manipulation132 cited
  • 2007The Sensitivity of Review Results to Methods Used to Appraise and Incorporate Trial Quality Into Data Synthesis81 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

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