Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

There were large discrepancies in risk of bias tool judgments when a randomized controlled trial appeared in more than one systematic review

10 references·5 citing·35 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement83,813 cited
2009Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement63,979 cited
2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.44,857 cited
2011The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials33,776 cited
2008Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions25,045 cited
2010Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions5,176 cited
2009Risk of bias versus quality assessment of randomised controlled trials: cross sectional study348 cited
2014Evaluation of the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials: focus groups, online survey, proposed recommendations and their implementation340 cited
2012Testing the Risk of Bias tool showed low reliability between individual reviewers and across consensus assessments of reviewer pairs174 cited
2014Poor Reliability between Cochrane Reviewers and Blinded External Reviewers When Applying the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool in Physical Therapy Trials124 cited

Cited by

2018No firm evidence that lack of blinding affects estimates of mortality in randomized clinical trials of intensive care interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis37 cited
2019Inter-review agreement of risk-of-bias judgments varied in Cochrane reviews36 cited

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

2020

Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of non‐Cochrane updates of systematic reviews: A cross‐sectional study

19 cited

2019Overall bias and sample sizes were unchanged in ICU trials over time: a meta-epidemiological study14 cited

2018Assessment of research waste part 1: an exemplar from examining study design, surrogate and clinical endpoints in studies of calcium intake and vitamin D supplementation14 cited