References

• 1995Empirical Evidence of Bias5,632 cited
• 1995Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials5,560 cited
• 1998Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?3,560 cited
• 1996Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement3,337 cited
• 1996Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials3,126 cited
• 1996Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews538 cited
• 1994Assessing the Quality of Randomization From Reports of Controlled Trials Published in Obstetrics and Gynecology Journals512 cited
• 1982Reporting on Methods in Clinical Trials509 cited
• 1987Meta‐analysis of clinical trials as a scientific discipline. I: Control of bias and comparison with large co‐operative trials246 cited
• 1996Blinding and exclusions after allocation in randomised controlled trials: survey of published parallel group trials in obstetrics and gynaecology: Table 1161 cited
• 1983An evaluation of the quality of therapeutic studies in perinatal medicine67 cited
• 1994The quality of clinical trials published in The Journal of Family Practice, 1974-1991.51 cited
• 1995The methodologic quality of randomization as assessed from reports of trials in specialist and general medical journals.