SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Assessment of publication bias and outcome reporting bias in systematic reviews of health services and delivery research: A meta-epidemiological study
16 references·5 citing·35 second hop
Assessment of publication bias and outcome reporting bias in systematic reviews of health services and delivery research: A meta-epidemiological study (2020)Assessment of publication bias and outcom…Guidelines for reporting meta-epidemiological methodology research (2017)Guidelines for reporting meta…Association between prospective registration and overall reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study (2017)Association between prospecti…AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisa…Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study (2016)Epidemiology and Reporting Ch…The reporting characteristics and methodological quality of Cochrane reviews about health policy research (2014)The reporting characteristics…The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses (2014)The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (N…Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias — An Updated Review (2013)Systematic Review of the Empi…Clarifying differences between review designs and methods (2012)Clarifying differences betwee…The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)The Cochrane Collaboration's …Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (2011)Recommendations for examining…The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews (2010)The impact of outcome reporti…Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases (2010)Dissemination and publication…The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)The PRISMA statement for repo…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 Repo…External Validation of a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) (2007)External Validation of a Meas…Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)Meta-analysis of Observationa…Tools Designed to Support Self-Regulated Learning in Online Learning Environments: A Systematic Review (2022)Tools Designed to Support Sel…Keep calm and carry on: moral panic, predatory publishers, peer review, and the emperor’s new clothes (2022)Keep calm and carry on: moral…Critical appraisal of systematic reviews of intervention in dentistry published between 2019-2020 using the AMSTAR 2 tool (2022)Critical appraisal of systema…An overview of systematic reviews to determine the impact of socio‐environmental factors on health outcomes of people with disabilities (2021)An overview of systematic rev…A Systematic Review of Father–Child Play Interactions and the Impacts on Child Development (2021)A Systematic Review of Father…The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. (1979)Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis (1988)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups (2007)Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses (2010)Publication bias in clinical research (1991)Systematic Reviews in Health Care : Meta-Analysis in Context (2000)Publication Bias in Meta‐Analysis (2005)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies (PRISMA-DTA): explanation, elaboration, and checklist (2020)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2020)The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity (2020)Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias (2008)Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider (2012)The COMET Handbook: version 1.0 (2017)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)Theories of behaviour and behaviour change across the social and behavioural sciences: a scoping review (2014)Using Qualitative Evidence in Decision Making for Health and Social Interventions: An Approach to Assess Confidence in Findings from Qualitative Evidence Syntheses (GRADE-CERQual) (2015)A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences (2016)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (2011)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience (2013)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation (2015)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework (2005)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)Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide (2006)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2011The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials33,776 cited
  • 2009The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration28,094 cited
  • 2000Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting20,612 cited
  • 2014The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses17,633 cited
  • 2009The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration17,627 cited
  • 2017AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both10,605 cited
  • 2011Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials7,681 cited
  • 2010The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews1,133 cited
  • 2013Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias — An Updated Review1,126 cited
  • 2012Clarifying differences between review designs and methods1,061 cited
  • 2010Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases1,039 cited
  • 2016Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study766 cited

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

2007
External Validation of a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)
569 cited
  • 2017Guidelines for reporting meta-epidemiological methodology research514 cited
  • 2017Association between prospective registration and overall reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study322 cited
  • 2014The reporting characteristics and methodological quality of Cochrane reviews about health policy research114 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2022Tools Designed to Support Self-Regulated Learning in Online Learning Environments: A Systematic Review81 cited
    • 2021A Systematic Review of Father–Child Play Interactions and the Impacts on Child Development64 cited
    • 2021An overview of systematic reviews to determine the impact of socio‐environmental factors on health outcomes of people with disabilities43 cited
    • 2022Critical appraisal of systematic reviews of intervention in dentistry published between 2019-2020 using the AMSTAR 2 tool16 cited
    • 2022Keep calm and carry on: moral panic, predatory publishers, peer review, and the emperor’s new clothes14 cited