SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Assessment of the Publication Trends of COVID-19 Systematic Reviews and Randomized Controlled Trials
4 references·1 citing·19 second hop
Assessment of the Publication Trends of COVID-19 Systematic Reviews and Randomized Controlled Trials (2021)Assessment of the Publication Trends of C…Waste in covid-19 research (2020)Waste in covid-19 researchKeeping up with studies on covid-19: systematic search strategies and resources (2020)Keeping up with studies on co…Assessment of Publication Trends of Systematic Reviews and Randomized Clinical Trials, 1995 to 2017 (2019)Assessment of Publication Tre…The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)The Mass Production of Redund…Exploring decision-makers’ challenges and strategies when selecting multiple systematic reviews: insights for AI decision support tools in healthcare (2024)Exploring decision-makers’ ch…Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation (2015)Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis (2018)Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews? (2018)What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences (2018)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up? (2010)Methodological quality was critically low in 9/10 systematic reviews in advanced cancer patients—A methodological study (2021)The REPRISE project: protocol for an evaluation of REProducibility and Replicability In Syntheses of Evidence (2021)Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of treatment interventions for Internet use disorders: Critical analysis of the methodical quality according to the PRISMA guidelines (2023)Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence (2009)The mental health impact of the covid-19 pandemic on healthcare workers, and interventions to help them: A rapid systematic review (2020)Implicit bias in healthcare: clinical practice, research and decision making (2021)Comparison of mental health symptoms before and during the covid-19 pandemic: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis of 134 cohorts (2023)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2019)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Monitoring Information Flow on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) (2020)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2016The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses1,481 cited
  • 2020Waste in covid-19 research330 cited
  • 2019Assessment of Publication Trends of Systematic Reviews and Randomized Clinical Trials, 1995 to 2017100 cited
  • 2020Keeping up with studies on covid-19: systematic search strategies and resources16 cited

Cited by

  • 2024Exploring decision-makers’ challenges and strategies when selecting multiple systematic reviews: insights for AI decision support tools in healthcare9 cited

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