References

• 2016ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions20,711 cited
• 2011GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence8,377 cited
• 2011GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias)2,798 cited
• 2011GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision2,681 cited
• 2011GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency2,318 cited
• 2011GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence—publication bias1,817 cited
• 2007Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography1,532 cited
• 2011GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence1,335 cited
• 2018GRADE guidelines: 18. How ROBINS-I and other tools to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies should be used to rate the certainty of a body of evidence932 cited
• 2020Development of the Instrument to assess the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses (ICEMAN) in randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses750 cited
• 2014Selective reporting bias of harm outcomes within studies: findings from a cohort of systematic reviews214 cited
• 2018Critical appraisal of nonrandomized studies—A review of recommended and commonly used tools155 cited
• 2013Reporting of harms data in RCTs: a systematic review of empirical assessments against the CONSORT harms extension