SZodixStudyAcademic Library
DashboardShelvesOpen accessMy libraryInboxNotesWriteLearnAlerts
More
Ask your libraryNotificationsQuick citeReview
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Systematic reviews: When should they be updated?
6 references·0 citing·34 second hopsampled
Systematic reviews: When should they be updated? (2022)Systematic reviews: When should they be u…When to replicate systematic reviews of interventions: consensus checklist (2020)When to replicate systematic …Time-to-update of systematic reviews relative to the availability of new evidence (2018)Time-to-update of systematic …When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist (2016)When and how to update system…The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)The Mass Production of Redund…A Comparison of Statistical Methods for Identifying Out-of-Date Systematic Reviews (2012)A Comparison of Statistical M…Updating Systematic Reviews: An International Survey (2010)Updating Systematic Reviews: …Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review (2002)Mail and internet surveys : the tailored design method (2007)Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method (2007)Toward modernizing the systematic review pipeline in genetics: efficient updating via data mining (2012)Study-based registers reduce waste in systematic reviewing: discussion and case report (2019)Informing conservation decisions through evidence synthesis and communication (2020)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)Assessment of a method to detect signals for updating systematic reviews (2014)Citation Discovery Tools for Conducting Adaptive Meta-analyses to Update Systematic Reviews (2016)Unreported links between trial registrations and published articles were identified using document similarity measures in a cross-sectional analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (2017)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)Updating search strategies for systematic reviews using EndNote (2017)Does Talking on a Cell Phone, With a Passenger, or Dialing Affect Driving Performance? An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies (2018)Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the health sciences: Best practice methods for research syntheses (2019)Two new Later Stone Age sites from the Final Pleistocene in the Falémé Valley, eastern Senegal (2024)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)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)How Quickly Do Systematic Reviews Go Out of Date? A Survival Analysis (2007)Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up? (2010)Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias — An Updated Review (2013)The Systematic Review Data Repository (SRDR): descriptive characteristics of publicly available data and opportunities for research (2019)Automated medical literature screening using artificial intelligence: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2022)Systematic online living evidence summaries: emerging tools to accelerate evidence synthesis (2023)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)Epistemonikos: a comprehensive database of systematic reviews for health decision-making (2020)The REPRISE project: protocol for an evaluation of REProducibility and Replicability In Syntheses of Evidence (2021)Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews (2023)
this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

References

  • 2016The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses1,481 cited
  • 2016When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist424 cited
  • 2020When to replicate systematic reviews of interventions: consensus checklist109 cited
  • 2018Time-to-update of systematic reviews relative to the availability of new evidence72 cited
  • 2010Updating Systematic Reviews: An International Survey62 cited
  • 2012A Comparison of Statistical Methods for Identifying Out-of-Date Systematic Reviews34 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

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