SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
The methodologic quality of randomization as assessed from reports of trials in specialist and general medical journals.
0 references·9 citing·24 second hop
The methodologic quality of randomization as assessed from reports of trials in specialist and general medical journals. (1995)The methodologic quality of randomization…TIDieR checklist evaluation of clinical trial intervention reporting for recent FDA-approved anticancer medications (2019)TIDieR checklist evaluation o…‘Allocation concealment’: the evolution and adoption of a methodological term (2018)‘Allocation concealment’: the…Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT): Considerations for Neuropsychological Research (2014)Consolidated Standards of Rep…Assessment of the Methodologic Quality of Medical and Surgical Clinical Trials in Patients with Arthroplasty (2009)Assessment of the Methodologi…Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials: why bother? (2005)Assessing allocation concealm…Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomized controlled trials: Why bother? (2000)Assessing allocation concealm…Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials: why bother? (2000)Assessing allocation concealm…The quest for unbiased research: Randomized clinical trials and the CONSORT reporting guidelines (1997)The quest for unbiased resear…The Case for Establishing a Register of Randomised Controlled Trials of Mental Health Care (1994)The Case for Establishing a R…Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? (1998)The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration (2001)9: Integrating Findings: The Meta-Analysis of Research (1977)Publication bias in clinical research (1991)A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction (1992)Prevalence study of the randomized controlled trials in the Journal of Intellectual Disability Research: 1957–1994 (1997)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Clinical Evidence Articles in Equine Veterinary Journal : progress since inception (2006)Risk of bias in research in oral and maxillofacial surgery (2013)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies (2008)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement (1996)Das CONSORT Statement: Überarbeitete Empfehlungen zur Qualitätsverbesserung von Reports randomisierter Studien im Parallel-Design (2004)Critical appraisal of clinical studies in Chinese herbal medicine (2006)The 2001 STRICTA Recommendations for Reporting Acupuncture Research: A Review with Implications for Improving Controlled Clinical Trial Design (2009)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)Doug Altman's legacy to Cochrane and evidence synthesis (2018)Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide (2014)Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials (1996)The effect of bias on the magnitude of clinical outcomes in periodontology: a pilot study (2008)Are Neonatal Trials Better Conducted and Reported over the Last 6 Decades? An Analysis on Their Risk-of-Bias Status in Cochrane Reviews (2019)
this work references cited by second hop

References

No references inside the corpus for this window.

Cited by

  • 1997The quest for unbiased research: Randomized clinical trials and the CONSORT reporting guidelines49 cited
  • 2000Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials: why bother?37 cited
  • 2005Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials: why bother?29 cited
  • 2018‘Allocation concealment’: the evolution and adoption of a methodological term16 cited
  • 2009Assessment of the Methodologic Quality of Medical and Surgical Clinical Trials in Patients with Arthroplasty15 cited
  • 1994The Case for Establishing a Register of Randomised Controlled Trials of Mental Health Care15 cited
  • 2000Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomized controlled trials: Why bother?15 cited
  • 2014Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT): Considerations for Neuropsychological Research14 cited
  • 2019TIDieR checklist evaluation of clinical trial intervention reporting for recent FDA-approved anticancer medications11 cited

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