SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Inadequate critical appraisal of studies in systematic reviews of time to diagnosis
16 references·0 citing·29 second hop
Inadequate critical appraisal of studies in systematic reviews of time to diagnosis (2016)Inadequate critical appraisal of studies …The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses (2014)The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (N…Evaluation of the Endorsement of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Statement on the Quality of Published Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (2013)Evaluation of the Endorsement…QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (2011)QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for …'Scoping the scope' of a cochrane review (2011)'Scoping the scope' of a coch…CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomized Trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updat…CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updat…Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)Preferred reporting items for…Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for…The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies (2008)The Strengthening the Reporti…The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies (2007)The Strengthening the Reporti…The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies (2007)The Strengthening the Reporti…Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2007)Development of AMSTAR: a meas…Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)Evaluating non-randomised int…Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study (2002)Direction and impact of langu…Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)Meta-analysis of Observationa…Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Improving the quality of repo…The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. (1979)Book Reviews: Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis Larry V. Hedges and Ingram Olkin New York: Academic Press, 1985. xxii + 369 pp (1988)Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups (2007)Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses (2010)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration (2007)CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide (2014)The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis (1999)The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews (2003)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)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 healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (2014)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation (2015)Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide (2006)Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews (2016)Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement (2015)Physical, psychological and occupational consequences of job burnout: A systematic review of prospective studies (2017)Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement (2021)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement84,364 cited
  • 2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.48,853 cited
  • 2007The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies23,532 cited
  • 2000Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting20,612 cited
  • 2008The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies18,417 cited
  • 2007The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies17,960 cited
  • 2014The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses17,633 cited
  • 2011QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies14,549 cited
  • 2010CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials13,387 cited
  • 1999Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement4,828 cited
  • 2007Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews4,376 cited
  • 2010CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomized Trials3,833 cited
  • 2003

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

Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies
2,905 cited
  • 2011'Scoping the scope' of a cochrane review1,269 cited
  • 2013Evaluation of the Endorsement of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Statement on the Quality of Published Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses918 cited
  • 2002Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study891 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.