SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Joint editorial: Fostering innovation and improving impact assessment for journal publications in hydrology
8 references·0 citing·36 second hop
Joint editorial: Fostering innovation and improving impact assessment for journal publications in hydrology (2016)Joint editorial: Fostering innovation and…Offline: What is medicine's 5 sigma? (2015)Offline: What is medicine's 5…Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping (2014)Measuring the effectiveness o…Joint Editorial—On the future of journal publications in hydrology (2014)Joint Editorial—On the future…Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)Preferred reporting items for…Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for…Evidence synthesis as the key to more coherent and efficient research (2009)Evidence synthesis as the key…Something rotten at the core of science? (2001)Something rotten at the core …Best evidence synthesis: An intelligent alternative to meta-analysis (1995)Best evidence synthesis: An i…The Philosophical Basis of Peer Review and the Suppression of Innovation (1990)Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone? (2000)When worlds collide: Social science, politics, and the Rind et al. (1998) child sexual abuse meta-analysis. (2002)Peering at peer review revealed high degree of chance associated with funding of grant applications (2006)What is the future of peer review? Why is there fraud in science? Is plagiarism out of control? Why do scientists do bad things? Is it all a case of: "all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"? (2007)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)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)Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews (2016)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS (1963)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)AI-assisted peer review (2021)Epistemic Exclusion of Women Faculty and Faculty of Color: Understanding Scholar(ly) Devaluation as a Predictor of Turnover Intentions (2021)Nonreplicable publications are cited more than replicable ones (2021)Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research (1976)Meta-analysis in social research (1982)Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research. (1994)Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sexual offender recidivism studies. (1998)Methods for evaluating area-wide and organisation-based interventions in health and health care: a systematic review. (1999)The Characteristics of Persistent Sexual Offenders: A Meta-Analysis of Recidivism Studies. (2005)The cochrane database of systematic reviews (1996)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2008)The need to consider the wider agenda in systematic reviews and meta-analyses: breadth, timing, and depth of the evidence (2010)Graphical augmentations to the funnel plot assess the impact of additional evidence on a meta-analysis (2012)Trial sequential methods for meta‐analysis (2013)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement (2015)Editorial—Quantifying the impact of hydrological studies (2007)Joint editorial – Fostering innovation and improving impact assessment for journal publications in hydrology (2016)Detecting and avoiding likely false‐positive findings – a practical guide (2016)What is science’s crisis really about? (2017)What is wrong with evidence based policy, and how can it be improved? (2017)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.44,857 cited
  • 2009Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement37,549 cited
  • 1995Best evidence synthesis: An intelligent alternative to meta-analysis950 cited
  • 2014Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping337 cited
  • 2015Offline: What is medicine's 5 sigma?215 cited
  • 2001Something rotten at the core of science?105 cited
  • 2009Evidence synthesis as the key to more coherent and efficient research94 cited
  • 2014Joint Editorial—On the future of journal publications in hydrology20 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

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