SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

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

Stratification by quality induced selection bias in a meta-analysis of clinical trials · Study

ReviewStratification by quality induced selection bias in a meta-analysis of clinical trials

Jennifer Stone2018

Review2018

Stratification by quality induced selection bias in a meta-analysis of clinical trials

Jennifer Stone · Usha Gurunathan · Kathryn Glass · Zachary Munn · Peter Tugwell · Suhail A.R. Doi

75 citations·0/0 files stored·Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Advanced Causal Inference Techniques Statistical Methods in Epidemiology

Abstract

No abstract was published for this record.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 75 citations exist upstream.

References

2003Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses 2011The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials 1996Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?2011Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials 1998Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?2011GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias)1999The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis 1981A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial

Cited by

2019Comparison of bias adjustment methods in meta-analysis suggests that quality effects modeling may have less limitations than other approaches 2019A unified framework for bias assessment in clinical research 2021Methodological issues of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the field of sleep medicine: A meta-epidemiological study 2021Bias Assessment in Outcomes Research: The Role of Relative Versus Absolute Approaches

Related works

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

2019Comparison of bias adjustment methods in meta-analysis suggests that quality effects modeling may have less limitations than other approachesarticle · 20 shared references 2019A unified framework for bias assessment in clinical researchreview · 16 shared references 2021Bias Assessment in Outcomes Research: The Role of Relative Versus Absolute Approachesarticle · 14 shared references 2006Adjustment of meta-analyses on the basis of quality scores should be abandonedreview · 12 shared references 2002Impact of quality scales on levels of evidence inferred from a systematic review of exercise therapy and low back painreview · 11 shared references 2015Are current standards of reporting quality for clinical trials sufficient in addressing important sources of bias?review · 11 shared references

Details

Year2018

Typereview

Published2018-11-17

VenueJournal of Clinical Epidemiology

ISSN-L0895-4356

Languageen

Citations75

Files0 public / 0

ShelfMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Identifiers

doi10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.11.015

openalex_workW2900643103

Links

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.

2025

Examining and Interpreting Doi Plot Asymmetry in Meta‐Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials

2022One-Third of Systematic Reviews in Rehabilitation Applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) System to Evaluate Certainty of Evidence: A Meta-Research Study