SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
The Quality of Systematic Reviews in Head and Neck Microsurgery
16 references·1 citing·46 second hopsampled
The Quality of Systematic Reviews in Head and Neck Microsurgery (2018)The Quality of Systematic Reviews in Head…An Update on the Level of Evidence for Plastic Surgery Research Published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (2016)An Update on the Level of Evi…Methodologic Quality of Systematic Reviews Published in the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Literature (2015)Methodologic Quality of Syste…Critical appraisal of AMSTAR: challenges, limitations, and potential solutions from the perspective of an assessor (2015)Critical appraisal of AMSTAR:…Compliance of Systematic Reviews in Plastic Surgery With the PRISMA Statement (2015)Compliance of Systematic Revi…Review of mixed treatment comparisons in published systematic reviews shows marked increase since 2009 (2014)Review of mixed treatment com…Systematic reviews explained: AMSTAR-how to tell the good from the bad and the ugly. (2013)Systematic reviews explained:…Randomised controlled trials in plastic surgery: a systematic review of reporting quality (2013)Randomised controlled trials …Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (2011)Systematic Reviews and Meta-A…Methodological Concerns and Quality Appraisal of Contemporary Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Pediatric Urology (2011)Methodological Concerns and Q…Quality of systematic reviews in pediatric oncology – A systematic review (2009)Quality of systematic reviews…AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2009)AMSTAR is a reliable and vali…Systematic Reviews: A Primer for Plastic Surgery Research (2007)Systematic Reviews: A Primer …External Validation of a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) (2007)External Validation of a Meas…Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2007)Development of AMSTAR: a meas…Validation of an index of the quality of review articles (1991)Validation of an index of the…Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials (1987)Meta-Analyses of Randomized C…The methodological quality of surgical randomized controlled trials: A cross-sectional systemic review (2021)The methodological quality of…Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies (2008)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Assessing the Risk of Bias of Individual Studies in Systematic Reviews of Health Care Interventions (2017)Recommendations for assessing the risk of bias in systematic reviews of health-care interventions (2017)A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales (1960)Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. (1971)STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT (1986)Ten simple rules for conducting umbrella reviews (2018)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)Ranking treatments in frequentist network meta-analysis works without resampling methods (2015)The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations (2015)GetReal in network meta‐analysis: a review of the methodology (2016)The Combination of Estimates from Different Experiments (1954)Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research (1976)The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. (1979)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)Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. (1968)Risks of all-cause and suicide mortality in mental disorders: a meta-review (2014)Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews (2014)A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial (1981)Meta-Analysis in Clinical Research (1987)Methodological index for non‐randomized studies ( MINORS ): development and validation of a new instrument (2003)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)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)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. (1996)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Meta-analysis as Evidence (2014)Methodological Standards for Meta-Analyses and Qualitative Systematic Reviews of Cardiac Prevention and Treatment Studies: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2017)Managing overlap of primary study results across systematic reviews: practical considerations for authors of overviews of reviews (2021)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 (2010)Impact of the mandatory implementation of reporting guidelines on reporting quality in a surgical journal: A before and after study (2016)Evolution of poor reporting and inadequate methods over time in 20 920 randomised controlled trials included in Cochrane reviews: research on research study (2017)PRISMA 2020 statement: What's new and the importance of reporting guidelines (2021)Characteristics and knowledge synthesis approach for 456 network meta-analyses: a scoping review (2017)Methodological quality of meta-analyses of single-case experimental studies (2017)Neighbourhood community life and health: A systematic review of reviews (2019)
this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

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
  • 1987Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials1,253 cited
  • 1991Validation of an index of the quality of review articles788 cited
  • 2007External Validation of a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)569 cited
  • 2013Systematic reviews explained: AMSTAR-how to tell the good from the bad and the ugly.116 cited
  • 2015Critical appraisal of AMSTAR: challenges, limitations, and potential solutions from the perspective of an assessor111 cited
  • 2014Review of mixed treatment comparisons in published systematic reviews shows marked increase since 200990 cited
  • 2013Randomised controlled trials in plastic surgery: a systematic review of reporting quality81 cited
  • 2009Quality of systematic reviews in pediatric oncology – A systematic review78 cited
  • 2007Systematic Reviews: A Primer for Plastic Surgery Research68 cited
  • 2011Methodological Concerns and Quality Appraisal of Contemporary Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Pediatric Urology50 cited
  • 2011Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis43 cited
  • 2016An Update on the Level of Evidence for Plastic Surgery Research Published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

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

39 cited
  • 2015Methodologic Quality of Systematic Reviews Published in the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Literature36 cited
  • 2015Compliance of Systematic Reviews in Plastic Surgery With the PRISMA Statement34 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2021The methodological quality of surgical randomized controlled trials: A cross-sectional systemic review5 cited