SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to the treatment of proximal humeral fractures
16 references·8 citing·38 second hop
Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to the treatment of proximal humeral fractures (2021)Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of sy…The quality of systematic reviews/meta‐analyses published in the field of bariatrics: A cross‐sectional systematic survey using AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS (2020)The quality of systematic rev…Evaluation of spin in abstracts of papers in psychiatry and psychology journals (2019)Evaluation of spin in abstrac…Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2019)Cochrane Handbook for Systema…Assessment of reporting quality of abstracts of systematic reviews with meta-analysis using PRISMA-A and discordance in assessments between raters without prior experience (2019)Assessment of reporting quali…A psychometric study found AMSTAR 2 to be a valid and moderately reliable appraisal tool (2019)A psychometric study found AM…Presence of ‘spin’ in the abstracts and titles of anaesthesiology randomised controlled trials (2018)Presence of ‘spin’ in the abs…Evaluation of spin within abstracts in obesity randomized clinical trials: A cross‐sectional review (2018)Evaluation of spin within abs…Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of otolaryngology randomized controlled trials (2018)Evaluation of spin in the abs…A systematic assessment of Cochrane reviews and systematic reviews published in high-impact medical journals related to cancer (2018)A systematic assessment of Co…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…A new classification of spin in systematic reviews and meta-analyses was developed and ranked according to the severity (2016)A new classification of spin …Reporting and methodological qualities of published surgical meta-analyses (2015)Reporting and methodological …Impact of Spin in the Abstracts of Articles Reporting Results of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Field of Cancer: The SPIIN Randomized Controlled Trial (2014)Impact of Spin in the Abstrac…PRISMA for Abstracts: Reporting Systematic Reviews in Journal and Conference Abstracts (2013)PRISMA for Abstracts: Reporti…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…Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Cochrane Handbook for Systema…Reporting Bias in the Form of Positive Spin Is Highly Prevalent in Abstracts of Systematic Reviews on Primary Repair of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament (2024)Reporting Bias in the Form of…Spin in the Abstracts of Meta-analyses and Systematic Reviews: Quadriceps Tendon Graft for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (2023)Spin in the Abstracts of Meta…Evaluation of Spin in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques and Standard Microdiscectomies for Treating Lumbar Disc Herniation (2023)Evaluation of Spin in Systema…Assessment of Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses on Platelet-Rich Plasma Treatment in Orthopaedics: A Cross-sectional Analysis (2023)Assessment of Spin in the Abs…Spin in the Abstracts of Meta-analyses and Systematic Reviews: Midshaft Clavicle Fracture (2022)Spin in the Abstracts of Meta…Reporting Bias in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Related to the Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures: The Presence of Spin in the Abstract (2022)Reporting Bias in Systematic …Evaluation of spin in systematic reviews and meta-analyses of superior capsular reconstruction (2022)Evaluation of spin in systema…Evaluation of “Spin” in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Focused on Cataract Therapies (2021)Evaluation of “Spin” in the A…Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)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)CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study (2016)La extensión de la declaración PRISMA para revisiones sistemáticas que incorporan metaanálisis en red: PRISMA-NMA (2016)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in ecology and evolutionary biology: a PRISMA extension (2021)Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study (2008)Reporting and Interpretation of Randomized Controlled Trials With Statistically Nonsignificant Results for Primary Outcomes (2010)Use of positive and negative words in scientific PubMed abstracts between 1974 and 2014: retrospective analysis (2015)‘Spin’ in published biomedical literature: A methodological systematic review (2017)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (2011)Overinterpretation of Research Findings: Evidence of “Spin” in Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (2017)Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the health sciences: Best practice methods for research syntheses (2019)Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews (2023)Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework (2005)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 review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation (2015)A systematic review of the quality of conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric surgery (2017)The methodological quality of systematic reviews on the treatment of adult major depression needs improvement according to AMSTAR 2: A cross-sectional study (2020)Restrictions and their reporting in systematic reviews of effectiveness: an observational study (2022)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2007)A comparison of two assessment tools used in overviews of systematic reviews: ROBIS versus AMSTAR-2 (2021)Cochrane's risk of bias tool for non-randomized studies (ROBINS-I) is frequently misapplied: A methodological systematic review (2021)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Authors should clearly report how they derived the overall rating when applying AMSTAR 2—a cross-sectional study (2020)Quality appraisal of systematic reviews of interventions for children with cerebral palsy reveals critically low confidence (2021)Can Communication Technologies Reduce Loneliness and Social Isolation in Older People? A Scoping Review of Reviews (2022)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)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2009The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration28,094 cited
  • 2008Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions25,045 cited
  • 2019Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions14,763 cited
  • 2017AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both10,605 cited
  • 2013PRISMA for Abstracts: Reporting Systematic Reviews in Journal and Conference Abstracts706 cited
  • 2014Impact of Spin in the Abstracts of Articles Reporting Results of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Field of Cancer: The SPIIN Randomized Controlled Trial366 cited
  • 2016A new classification of spin in systematic reviews and meta-analyses was developed and ranked according to the severity224 cited
  • 2019A psychometric study found AMSTAR 2 to be a valid and moderately reliable appraisal tool207 cited
  • 2018A systematic assessment of Cochrane reviews and systematic reviews published in high-impact medical journals related to cancer84 cited
  • 2020The quality of systematic reviews/meta‐analyses published in the field of bariatrics: A cross‐sectional systematic survey using AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS71 cited
  • 2019Evaluation of spin in abstracts of papers in psychiatry and psychology journals68 cited
  • 2018Evaluation of spin within abstracts in obesity randomized clinical trials: A cross‐sectional review52 cited

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

2018
Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of otolaryngology randomized controlled trials
50 cited
  • 2018Presence of ‘spin’ in the abstracts and titles of anaesthesiology randomised controlled trials48 cited
  • 2015Reporting and methodological qualities of published surgical meta-analyses43 cited
  • 2019Assessment of reporting quality of abstracts of systematic reviews with meta-analysis using PRISMA-A and discordance in assessments between raters without prior experience43 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2022Evaluation of spin in systematic reviews and meta-analyses of superior capsular reconstruction34 cited
    • 2023Assessment of Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses on Platelet-Rich Plasma Treatment in Orthopaedics: A Cross-sectional Analysis17 cited
    • 2023Spin in the Abstracts of Meta-analyses and Systematic Reviews: Quadriceps Tendon Graft for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction14 cited
    • 2024Reporting Bias in the Form of Positive Spin Is Highly Prevalent in Abstracts of Systematic Reviews on Primary Repair of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament13 cited
    • 2022Reporting Bias in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Related to the Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures: The Presence of Spin in the Abstract12 cited
    • 2022Spin in the Abstracts of Meta-analyses and Systematic Reviews: Midshaft Clavicle Fracture12 cited
    • 2021Evaluation of “Spin” in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Focused on Cataract Therapies12 cited
    • 2023Evaluation of Spin in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques and Standard Microdiscectomies for Treating Lumbar Disc Herniation11 cited