SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Evidence reversal—when new evidence contradicts current claims: a systematic overview review of definitions and terms
9 references·3 citing·49 second hop
Evidence reversal—when new evidence contradicts current claims: a systematic overview review of definitions and terms (2017)Evidence reversal—when new evidence contr…AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2009)AMSTAR is a reliable and vali…Persistence of Contradicted Claims in the Literature (2007)Persistence of Contradicted C…How Quickly Do Systematic Reviews Go Out of Date? A Survival Analysis (2007)How Quickly Do Systematic Rev…Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2007)Development of AMSTAR: a meas…Evolution and Translation of Research Findings: From Bench to Where (2006)Evolution and Translation of …Molecular Bias (2005)Molecular BiasEarly extreme contradictory estimates may appear in published research: The Proteus phenomenon in molecular genetics research and randomized trials (2005)Early extreme contradictory e…Contradicted and Initially Stronger Effects in Highly Cited Clinical Research (2005)Contradicted and Initially St…Effect sizes in cumulative meta-analyses of mental health randomized trials evolved over time (2004)Effect sizes in cumulative me…Ethics and Academic Discourse, Scientific Integrity, Uncertainty, and Disinformation in Medicine: An American College of Physicians Position Paper (2024)Ethics and Academic Discourse…Factors associated with successful publication for systematic review protocol registration: an analysis of 397 registered protocols (2023)Factors associated with succe…The risk of conclusion change in systematic review updates can be estimated by learning from a database of published examples (2019)The risk of conclusion change…The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Selection in Reported Epidemiological Risks: An Empirical Assessment (2007)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False: Author's Reply to Goodman and Greenland (2007)Evidence Gap Maps — A Tool for Promoting Evidence-Informed Policy and Prioritizing Future Research (2013)Meta-analysis in clinical trials (1986)Cumulative Meta-Analysis of Therapeutic Trials for Myocardial Infarction (1992)Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study (2002)Cultural competence and evidence-based practice in mental health: Epistemic communities and the politics of pluralism (2012)Efficacy of Pharmacotherapy and Psychotherapy for Adult Psychiatric Disorders (2014)The Robustness of the Corporate Social and Financial Performance Relation: A Second‐Order Meta‐Analysis (2018)A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales (1960)Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. (1968)STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT (1986)Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions (2011)Risks of all-cause and suicide mortality in mental disorders: a meta-review (2014)Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews (2014)Publication bias in clinical research (1991)Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research Designs (2000)Trial sequential analysis may establish when firm evidence is reached in cumulative meta-analysis (2007)Why Most Discovered True Associations Are Inflated (2008)Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling (2012)Discrepancies between Meta-Analyses and Subsequent Large Randomized, Controlled Trials (1997)Living Systematic Reviews: An Emerging Opportunity to Narrow the Evidence-Practice Gap (2014)Systematic review automation technologies (2014)Living systematic review: 1. Introduction—the why, what, when, and how (2017)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)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)Summarizing systematic reviews (2015)Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS) (2016)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Comparison of Evidence of Treatment Effects in Randomized and Nonrandomized Studies (2001)Everyone's a Little Bit Biased (Even Physicians) (2008)A generalized view of self-citation: Direct, co-author, collaborative, and coercive induced self-citation (2014)Learning From Testimony on Quantitative Research in Management (2019)The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. (1979)The Handbook of Research Synthesis. (1995)Why Science Is Not Necessarily Self-Correcting (2012)Meta-analytic evidence for effects of mindfulness training on dimensions of self-reported dispositional mindfulness. (2016)Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science (2021)Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches (2015)The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)Updating systematic reviews can improve the precision of outcomes: a comparative study (2020)Identifying unreported links between ClinicalTrials.gov trial registrations and their published results (2021)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)Quantitative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews (1997)Molecular evidence‐based medicine (2007)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2007Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews4,376 cited
  • 2009AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews1,756 cited
  • 2005Contradicted and Initially Stronger Effects in Highly Cited Clinical Research1,465 cited
  • 2007How Quickly Do Systematic Reviews Go Out of Date? A Survival Analysis837 cited
  • 2005Early extreme contradictory estimates may appear in published research: The Proteus phenomenon in molecular genetics research and randomized trials326 cited
  • 2007Persistence of Contradicted Claims in the Literature227 cited
  • 2004Effect sizes in cumulative meta-analyses of mental health randomized trials evolved over time177 cited
  • 2006Evolution and Translation of Research Findings: From Bench to Where129 cited
  • 2005Molecular Bias31 cited

Cited by

  • 2019The risk of conclusion change in systematic review updates can be estimated by learning from a database of published examples15 cited
  • 2023Factors associated with successful publication for systematic review protocol registration: an analysis of 397 registered protocols10 cited
  • 2024Ethics and Academic Discourse, Scientific Integrity, Uncertainty, and Disinformation in Medicine: An American College of Physicians Position Paper7 cited

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