SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Is the quality of systematic reviews influenced by prospective registration: a methods review of systematic musculoskeletal physical therapy reviews
16 references·1 citing·42 second hopsampled
Is the quality of systematic reviews influenced by prospective registration: a methods review of systematic musculoskeletal physical therapy reviews (2022)Is the quality of systematic reviews infl…Where to prospectively register a systematic review (2022)Where to prospectively regist…Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement (2021)Updating guidance for reporti…A comparison of two assessment tools used in overviews of systematic reviews: ROBIS versus AMSTAR-2 (2021)A comparison of two assessmen…A psychometric study found AMSTAR 2 to be a valid and moderately reliable appraisal tool (2019)A psychometric study found AM…Quality assessment versus risk of bias in systematic reviews: AMSTAR and ROBIS had similar reliability but differed in their construct and applicability (2018)Quality assessment versus ris…Evaluation of the reliability, usability, and applicability of AMSTAR, AMSTAR 2, and ROBIS: protocol for a descriptive analytic study (2018)Evaluation of the reliability…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…The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)The Mass Production of Redund…Impact of librarians on reporting of the literature searching component of pediatric systematic reviews (2016)Impact of librarians on repor…Use of Recommended Search Strategies in Systematic Reviews and the Impact of Librarian Involvement: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Recent Authors (2015)Use of Recommended Search Str…Librarian co-authors correlated with higher quality reported search strategies in general internal medicine systematic reviews (2015)Librarian co-authors correlat…Network meta-analyses could be improved by searching more sources and by involving a librarian (2014)Network meta-analyses could b…The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)The PRISMA statement for repo…The Kappa Statistic in Reliability Studies: Use, Interpretation, and Sample Size Requirements (2005)The Kappa Statistic in Reliab…Bias, prevalence and kappa (1993)Bias, prevalence and kappaCoefficient Kappa: Some Uses, Misuses, and Alternatives (1981)Coefficient Kappa: Some Uses,…“Trustworthiness,” confidence in estimated effects, and confidently translating research into clinical practice (2023)“Trustworthiness,” confidence…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)Errors in search strategies used in systematic reviews and their effects on information retrieval (2019)Music therapy for stress reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2020)A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales (1960)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)High agreement but low Kappa: I. the problems of two paradoxes (1990)Inter-Coder Agreement for Computational Linguistics (2008)Dealing with feeling: A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion regulation. (2012)The Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy (v1) of 93 Hierarchically Clustered Techniques: Building an International Consensus for the Reporting of Behavior Change Interventions (2013)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Reliability of Content Analysis: The Case of Nominal Scale Coding (1955)Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. (1968)Reliability of Nominal Data Based on Qualitative Judgments (1989)Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural development inventory (2003)STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT (1986)Method agreement analysis: A review of correct methodology (2010)Psychometric properties of the PTSD Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–Fifth Edition (PCL-5) in veterans. (2015)New WHO prevalence estimates of mental disorders in conflict settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2019)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)Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework (2005)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)Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2007)Cochrane's risk of bias tool for non-randomized studies (ROBINS-I) is frequently misapplied: A methodological systematic review (2021)Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews (2023)PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2020)Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas (2021)Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The preregistration revolution (2018)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2021)A bibliometric analysis of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in ophthalmology (2023)Steps in undertaking meta-analysis and addressing heterogeneity in meta-analysis (2023)
this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

References

  • 2009The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration17,627 cited
  • 2017AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both10,605 cited
  • 2005The Kappa Statistic in Reliability Studies: Use, Interpretation, and Sample Size Requirements4,093 cited
  • 2021Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement3,479 cited
  • 1993Bias, prevalence and kappa2,175 cited
  • 1981Coefficient Kappa: Some Uses, Misuses, and Alternatives1,575 cited
  • 2016The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses1,481 cited
  • 2015Librarian co-authors correlated with higher quality reported search strategies in general internal medicine systematic reviews330 cited
  • 2019A psychometric study found AMSTAR 2 to be a valid and moderately reliable appraisal tool207 cited
  • 2022Where to prospectively register a systematic review193 cited
  • 2014Network meta-analyses could be improved by searching more sources and by involving a librarian169 cited
  • 2015Use of Recommended Search Strategies in Systematic Reviews and the Impact of Librarian Involvement: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Recent Authors159 cited
  • 2021A comparison of two assessment tools used in overviews of systematic reviews: ROBIS versus AMSTAR-2

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

129 cited
  • 2016Impact of librarians on reporting of the literature searching component of pediatric systematic reviews108 cited
  • 2018Quality assessment versus risk of bias in systematic reviews: AMSTAR and ROBIS had similar reliability but differed in their construct and applicability94 cited
  • 2018Evaluation of the reliability, usability, and applicability of AMSTAR, AMSTAR 2, and ROBIS: protocol for a descriptive analytic study60 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2023“Trustworthiness,” confidence in estimated effects, and confidently translating research into clinical practice8 cited