SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
A systematic review and in‐depth analysis of outcome reporting in early phase studies of colorectal cancer surgical innovation
6 references·0 citing·27 second hop
A systematic review and in‐depth analysis of outcome reporting in early phase studies of colorectal cancer surgical innovation (2020)A systematic review and in‐depth analysis…What is an invasive procedure? A definition to inform study design, evidence synthesis and research tracking (2019)What is an invasive procedure…PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement (2016)PRESS Peer Review of Electron…A systematic review of outcome reporting in colorectal cancer surgery (2013)A systematic review of outcom…The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews (2012)The nuts and bolts of PROSPER…Challenges in evaluating surgical innovation (2009)Challenges in evaluating surg…Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence (2009)Avoidable waste in the produc…Extending the CONSORT Statement to Randomized Trials of Nonpharmacologic Treatment: Explanation and Elaboration (2008)Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement (2008)IDEAL framework for surgical innovation 1: the idea and development stages (2013)No Surgical Innovation Without Evaluation (2018)The IDEAL Reporting Guidelines (2020)Users' Guides to the Medical Literature (1999)Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations (2003)The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews (2010)Patient-reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials of colorectal cancer: an analysis determining the availability of robust data to inform clinical decision-making (2015)Core Outcomes for Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Consensus Study (2016)Three nested randomized controlled trials of peer-only or multiple stakeholder group feedback within Delphi surveys during core outcome and information set development (2016)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)Conceptual and Technical Challenges in Network Meta-analysis (2013)Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research (2014)Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas (2021)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018)Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews (2020)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The Reporting of Randomized Clinical Trials Using a Surgical Intervention Is in Need of Immediate Improvement (2006)A systematic review of reporting quality for anaesthetic interventions in randomised controlled trials (2020)The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review (2020)Methodological quality for systematic reviews of adverse events with surgical interventions: a cross-sectional survey (2021)CONSORT Statement for Randomized Trials of Nonpharmacologic Treatments: A 2017 Update and a CONSORT Extension for Nonpharmacologic Trial Abstracts (2017)The COMET Handbook: version 1.0 (2017)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2016PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement5,681 cited
  • 2009Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence2,204 cited
  • 2012The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews1,430 cited
  • 2009Challenges in evaluating surgical innovation654 cited
  • 2019What is an invasive procedure? A definition to inform study design, evidence synthesis and research tracking111 cited
  • 2013A systematic review of outcome reporting in colorectal cancer surgery68 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