SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Heterogeneity in application, design, and analysis characteristics was found for controlled before-after and interrupted time series studies included in Cochrane reviews
13 references·5 citing·44 second hop
Heterogeneity in application, design, and analysis characteristics was found for controlled before-after and interrupted time series studies included in Cochrane reviews (2017)Heterogeneity in application, design, and…ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessin…Issues relating to study design and risk of bias when including non‐randomized studies in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions (2012)Issues relating to study desi…Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals (2012)Consolidated standards of rep…Testing a tool for the classification of study designs in systematic reviews of interventions and exposures showed moderate reliability and low accuracy (2011)Testing a tool for the classi…Improved health outcomes in urban slums through infrastructure upgrading (2010)Improved health outcomes in u…Including Non‐Randomized Studies (2008)Including Non‐Randomized Stud…Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Cochrane Handbook for Systema…Challenges in Using Nonrandomized Studies in Systematic Reviews of Treatment Interventions (2005)Challenges in Using Nonrandom…Improving the Reporting Quality of Nonrandomized Evaluations of Behavioral and Public Health Interventions: The TREND Statement (2004)Improving the Reporting Quali…INTERRUPTED TIME SERIES DESIGNS IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: LESSONS FROM TWO SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OF BEHAVIOR CHANGE STRATEGIES (2003)INTERRUPTED TIME SERIES DESIG…Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)Evaluating non-randomised int…Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions (2002)Criteria for evaluating evide…Shelter upgrading for the urban poor : evaluation of Third World experience (1987)Shelter upgrading for the urb…Empirical evaluation of the methods used in systematic reviews including observational studies and randomized trials (2023)Empirical evaluation of the m…Methodological systematic review recommends improvements to conduct and reporting when meta-analyzing interrupted time series studies (2022)Methodological systematic rev…Taxation of the fat content of foods for reducing their consumption and preventing obesity or other adverse health outcomes (2020)Taxation of the fat content o…A systematic review of interventions to improve uptake of pertussis vaccination in pregnancy (2019)A systematic review of interv…Study filters for non-randomized studies of interventions consistently lacked sensitivity upon external validation (2018)Study filters for non-randomi…The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. (1998)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses (2014)Association Between Portable Screen-Based Media Device Access or Use and Sleep Outcomes (2016)Mindfulness and acceptance approaches to sporting performance enhancement: a systematic review (2017)Prevalence of problematic smartphone usage and associated mental health outcomes amongst children and young people: a systematic review, meta-analysis and GRADE of the evidence (2019)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)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (1963)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)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)Assessing risk of bias in prevalence studies: modification of an existing tool and evidence of interrater agreement (2012)Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research Designs (2000)Evaluating offending behaviour programmes (2008)Using Multiple Types of Studies in Systematic Reviews of Health Care Interventions – A Systematic Review (2013)Dance for People With Parkinson Disease: What Is the Evidence Telling Us? (2014)Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies (2008)Including non‐randomized studies on intervention effects (2019)The Effect of Principal Behaviors on Student, Teacher, and School Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2019)A meta-analytic review of food safety risk perception (2020)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)Does use of the CONSORT Statement impact the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials published in medical journals? A Cochrane reviewa (2012)A taxonomy of behaviour change methods: an Intervention Mapping approach (2015)The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity (2020)The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration (2001)A taxonomy of behavior change techniques used in interventions. (2008)A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research (2009)Mass media interventions: effects on health services utilisation (2002)Systematic reviews of the effectiveness of quality improvement strategies and programmes (2003)Paying for performance to improve the delivery of health interventions in low- and middle-income countries (2012)Immediate impact of minimum unit pricing on alcohol purchases in Scotland: controlled interrupted time series analysis for 2015-18 (2019)A Process for Systematically Reviewing the Literature: Providing the Research Evidence for Public Health Nursing Interventions (2004)Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (2005)Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide (2006)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)Two new Later Stone Age sites from the Final Pleistocene in the Falémé Valley, eastern Senegal (2024)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2008Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions25,045 cited
  • 2016ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions20,225 cited
  • 2003Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies2,905 cited
  • 2004Improving the Reporting Quality of Nonrandomized Evaluations of Behavioral and Public Health Interventions: The TREND Statement2,804 cited
  • 2002Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions1,042 cited
  • 2012Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals739 cited
  • 2003INTERRUPTED TIME SERIES DESIGNS IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: LESSONS FROM TWO SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OF BEHAVIOR CHANGE STRATEGIES703 cited
  • 2008Including Non‐Randomized Studies308 cited
  • 2012Issues relating to study design and risk of bias when including non‐randomized studies in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions183 cited
  • 2005Challenges in Using Nonrandomized Studies in Systematic Reviews of Treatment Interventions101 cited
  • 2010Improved health outcomes in urban slums through infrastructure upgrading99 cited
  • 2011Testing a tool for the classification of study designs in systematic reviews of interventions and exposures showed moderate reliability and low accuracy69 cited
  • 1987Shelter upgrading for the urban poor : evaluation of Third World experience

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

35 cited

Cited by

  • 2019A systematic review of interventions to improve uptake of pertussis vaccination in pregnancy46 cited
  • 2020Taxation of the fat content of foods for reducing their consumption and preventing obesity or other adverse health outcomes45 cited
  • 2022Methodological systematic review recommends improvements to conduct and reporting when meta-analyzing interrupted time series studies19 cited
  • 2018Study filters for non-randomized studies of interventions consistently lacked sensitivity upon external validation13 cited
  • 2023Empirical evaluation of the methods used in systematic reviews including observational studies and randomized trials12 cited