SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Appraising Evidence
16 references·0 citing·40 second hopsampled
Appraising Evidence (2018)Appraising EvidenceSTARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration (2016)STARD 2015 guidelines for rep…STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies (2015)STARD 2015: an updated list o…Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research (2014)Reducing waste from incomplet…Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable (2014)Applying Grading of Recommend…Understanding the Direction of Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (2013)Understanding the Direction o…A systematic review classifies sources of bias and variation in diagnostic test accuracy studies (2013)A systematic review classifie…QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (2011)QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for …GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence (2011)GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating t…Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (2008)Systematic Reviews of Diagnos…Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies (2006)Evidence of bias and variatio…Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (2006)Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool …No role for quality scores in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies (2005)No role for quality scores in…Sources of Variation and Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (2004)Sources of Variation and Bias…The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews (2003)The development of QUADAS: a …Spectrum Bias or Spectrum Effect? Subgroup Variation in Diagnostic Test Evaluation (2002)Spectrum Bias or Spectrum Eff…Empirical Evidence of Design-Related Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Tests (1999)Empirical Evidence of Design-…Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD Initiative (2003)Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD Initiative (2003)Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care (2010)The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta‐analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review (2015)Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary roc curve: Data‐analytic approaches and some additional considerations (1993)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Use of Methodological Standards in Diagnostic Test Research (1995)Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): Explanation and Elaboration (2015)Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews (2005)ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed (2015)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies (2007)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies (2007)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide (2014)The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) Statement (2015)TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods (2024)The STARD Statement for Reporting Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: Explanation and Elaboration (2003)Development and validation of methods for assessing the quality of diagnostic accuracy studies (2004)The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis (1999)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision (2011)GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) (2011)GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency (2011)A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis (2014)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool for animal studies (2014)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (2018)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies (PRISMA-DTA): explanation, elaboration, and checklist (2020)Two new Later Stone Age sites from the Final Pleistocene in the Falémé Valley, eastern Senegal (2024)Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures (2000)Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement (2021)Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis in diagnostic accuracy studies (2023)
this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

References

  • 2011QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies14,549 cited
  • 2011GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence8,377 cited
  • 2015STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies3,800 cited
  • 2003The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews3,593 cited
  • 2016STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration2,588 cited
  • 1999Empirical Evidence of Design-Related Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Tests1,860 cited
  • 2014Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research1,315 cited
  • 2008Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy1,124 cited
  • 2004Sources of Variation and Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy800 cited
  • 2006Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies769 cited
  • 2006Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies612 cited
  • 2005No role for quality scores in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies337 cited
  • 2002Spectrum Bias or Spectrum Effect? Subgroup Variation in Diagnostic Test Evaluation333 cited
  • 2013A systematic review classifies sources of bias and variation in diagnostic test accuracy studies

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

292 cited
  • 2013Understanding the Direction of Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Test Accuracy247 cited
  • 2014Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable171 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.