SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Reporting the level of evidence in the Canadian Journal of Plastic Surgery: Why is it important?
16 references·0 citing·35 second hop
Reporting the level of evidence in the Canadian Journal of Plastic Surgery: Why is it important? (2012)Reporting the level of evidence in the Ca…Designing and Reporting Case Series in Plastic Surgery (2011)Designing and Reporting Case …Health systems financing and the path to universal coverage (2010)Health systems financing and …A Detailed Analysis of Level I Evidence (Randomized Controlled Trials and Meta-Analyses) in Five Plastic Surgery Journals to Date: 1978 to 2009 (2010)A Detailed Analysis of Level …Quality of Clinical Studies in Aesthetic Surgery Journals: A 10-Year Review (2009)Quality of Clinical Studies i…Levels of Evidence in Research Published in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume) Over the Last Thirty Years (2009)Levels of Evidence in Researc…Evidence-Based Plastic Surgery (2008)Evidence-Based Plastic SurgeryEmpirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study (2008)Empirical evidence of bias in…The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies (2007)The Strengthening the Reporti…Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies (2007)Strengthening the reporting o…Milestones on the long road to knowledge (2007)Milestones on the long road t…Randomised clinical trials in plastic surgery: Survey of output and quality of reporting (2006)Randomised clinical trials in…THE QUALITY OF REPORTING OF RANDOMIZED TRIALS IN THE JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY FROM 1988 THROUGH 2000 (2002)THE QUALITY OF REPORTING OF R…The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials (2001)The CONSORT Statement: Revise…The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)The CONSORT statement: revise…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)Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis (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. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (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)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)Randomized, controlled trials in surgery (2001)INTRODUCING LEVELS OF EVIDENCE TO THE JOURNAL (2003)LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IN ORTHOPAEDIC JOURNALS (2005)Levels of Evidence in the Neurosurgical Literature (2012)Authorship Proliferation in the Orthopaedic Literature (2013)Have Levels of Evidence Improved the Quality of Orthopaedic Research? (2013)Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies (2008)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care (2010)GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) (2011)Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration (2007)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016 (2018)Mortality due to low-quality health systems in the universal health coverage era: a systematic analysis of amenable deaths in 137 countries (2018)Identifying Key Challenges Facing Healthcare Systems In Africa And Potential Solutions (2019)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies (2007)The Reporting of Randomized Clinical Trials Using a Surgical Intervention Is in Need of Immediate Improvement (2006)The reporting quality of randomised controlled trials in surgery: A systematic review (2007)The Fragility of Statistically Significant Findings From Randomized Trials in Sports Surgery: A Systematic Survey (2016)Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials (2001)Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD Initiative (2003)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide (2014)Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (2014)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2007The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies22,917 cited
  • 2000Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting20,612 cited
  • 2007Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies10,709 cited
  • 2001The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials5,372 cited
  • 1999Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement4,828 cited
  • 2001The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials2,545 cited
  • 2008Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study2,534 cited
  • 2010Health systems financing and the path to universal coverage1,280 cited
  • 2002THE QUALITY OF REPORTING OF RANDOMIZED TRIALS IN THE JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY FROM 1988 THROUGH 2000243 cited
  • 2009Levels of Evidence in Research Published in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume) Over the Last Thirty Years121 cited
  • 2007Milestones on the long road to knowledge56 cited
  • 2010A Detailed Analysis of Level I Evidence (Randomized Controlled Trials and Meta-Analyses) in Five Plastic Surgery Journals to Date: 1978 to 200951 cited

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

  • 2006Randomised clinical trials in plastic surgery: Survey of output and quality of reporting46 cited
  • 2011Designing and Reporting Case Series in Plastic Surgery41 cited
  • 2009Quality of Clinical Studies in Aesthetic Surgery Journals: A 10-Year Review36 cited
  • 2008Evidence-Based Plastic Surgery31 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.