SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
How to Critically Appraise and Interpret Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Accuracy: A User Guide
16 references·0 citing·36 second hop
How to Critically Appraise and Interpret Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Accuracy: A User Guide (2023)How to Critically Appraise and Interpret …Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (2023)Cochrane Handbook for Systema…Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2019)Cochrane Handbook for Systema…Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (2018)Preferred Reporting Items for…The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations (2015)The PRISMA Extension Statemen…ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed (2015)ROBIS: A new tool to assess r…Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data (2015)Preferred Reporting Items for…A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis (2014)A GRADE Working Group approac…Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 2 (2012)Evidence Synthesis for Decisi…QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (2011)QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for …Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting (2010)Meta-analysis of individual p…Undue reliance on I 2 in assessing heterogeneity may mislead (2008)Undue reliance on I 2 in asse…Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (2008)Systematic Reviews of Diagnos…Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews (2005)Bivariate analysis of sensiti…Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons (2004)Combination of direct and ind…A hierarchical regression approach to meta‐analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations (2001)A hierarchical regression app…Empirical Evidence of Design-Related Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Tests (1999)Empirical Evidence of Design-…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)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Optimal cut-off score for diagnosing depression with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9): a meta-analysis (2011)Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies: The CHARMS Checklist (2014)Screening for anxiety disorders with the GAD-7 and GAD-2: a systematic review and diagnostic metaanalysis (2015)Analysing and Presenting Results (2010)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)10.1007/978-1-4899-4485-6 (2000)Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta‐analysis (2010)Graphical Tools for Network Meta-Analysis in STATA (2013)The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance (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)Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses (2011)GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision (2011)GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence (2011)GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) (2011)Network meta-analysis: an introduction for clinicians (2016)GRADE 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 evidence (2018)CINeMA: An approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis (2020)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement (2021)The COMET Handbook: version 1.0 (2017)Accuracy of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for screening to detect major depression: individual participant data meta-analysis (2019)Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas (2021)Summarizing systematic reviews (2015)PROBAST: A Tool to Assess the Risk of Bias and Applicability of Prediction Model Studies (2018)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2019Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions14,763 cited
  • 2011QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies14,163 cited
  • 2015The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations8,248 cited
  • 2005Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews3,362 cited
  • 2018Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies3,196 cited
  • 2015ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed2,266 cited
  • 2004Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons2,168 cited
  • 2015Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data2,123 cited
  • 1999Empirical Evidence of Design-Related Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Tests1,860 cited
  • 2014A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis1,812 cited
  • 2010Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting1,701 cited
  • 2001A hierarchical regression approach to meta‐analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations1,509 cited
  • 2008Undue reliance on I 2 in assessing heterogeneity may mislead1,286 cited

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

  • 2012Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 21,206 cited
  • 2008Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy1,124 cited
  • 2023Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy755 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.