SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Few randomized trials in preterm birth prevention meet predefined usefulness criteria
9 references·1 citing·50 second hop
Few randomized trials in preterm birth prevention meet predefined usefulness criteria (2023)Few randomized trials in preterm birth pr…RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)RoB 2: a revised tool for ass…Increasing value and reducing research waste in obstetrics: towards woman‐centered research (2019)Increasing value and reducing…Sample size calculations are poorly conducted and reported in many randomized trials of hip and knee osteoarthritis: results of a systematic review (2018)Sample size calculations are …Reproducible research practices, transparency, and open access data in the biomedical literature, 2015–2017 (2018)Reproducible research practic…Inadvertent P‐hacking among trials and systematic reviews of the effect of progestogens in pregnancy? A systematic review and meta‐analysis (2017)Inadvertent P‐hacking among t…CONSORT 2010 statement: extension checklist for reporting within person randomised trials (2017)CONSORT 2010 statement: exten…Reproducible Research Practices and Transparency across the Biomedical Literature (2016)Reproducible Research Practic…Perceived information gain from randomized trials correlates with publication in high–impact factor journals (2012)Perceived information gain fr…Reports of clinical trials should begin and end with up-to-date systematic reviews of other relevant evidence: a status report (2007)Reports of clinical trials sh…The usefulness of randomized trials of lifestyle interventions for overweight, obesity, or metabolic syndrome: A systematic review (2024)The usefulness of randomized …Meta-analysis in clinical trials (1986)Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis (2002)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)Deep impact: unintended consequences of journal rank (2013)Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience (2013)Publication and other reporting biases in cognitive sciences: detection, prevalence, and prevention (2014)Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials (1996)Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials (1996)The CONSORT Statement (1996)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 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)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science (2015)The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)A manifesto for reproducible science (2017)A solution to minimum sample size for regressions (2020)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 Extent and Consequences of P-Hacking in Science (2015)Raiders of the lost HARK: a reproducible inference framework for big data science (2019)Moving towards less biased research (2021)Yet another problem with systematic reviews: a living review update (2024)CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)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)CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised crossover trials (2019)CONSORT 2025 statement: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials (2025)CONSORT 2025 statement: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials (2025)Radiological Assessment of Osteo-Arthrosis (1957)Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis (2014)Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research (2014)Reporting sample size calculations for randomized controlled trials published in nursing journals: A cross-sectional study (2019)Sample size justifications in Gait & Posture (2021)CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials (2025)Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data (2015)A core outcome set for pre‐eclampsia research: an international consensus development study (2020)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (2011)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)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Two new Later Stone Age sites from the Final Pleistocene in the Falémé Valley, eastern Senegal (2024)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (2005)Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond (2019)Reducing bias, increasing transparency and calibrating confidence with preregistration (2023)Large language models for conducting systematic reviews: on the rise, but not yet ready for use—a scoping review (2025)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2019RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials33,975 cited
  • 2016Reproducible Research Practices and Transparency across the Biomedical Literature314 cited
  • 2018Reproducible research practices, transparency, and open access data in the biomedical literature, 2015–2017287 cited
  • 2017CONSORT 2010 statement: extension checklist for reporting within person randomised trials265 cited
  • 2007Reports of clinical trials should begin and end with up-to-date systematic reviews of other relevant evidence: a status report149 cited
  • 2012Perceived information gain from randomized trials correlates with publication in high–impact factor journals41 cited
  • 2018Sample size calculations are poorly conducted and reported in many randomized trials of hip and knee osteoarthritis: results of a systematic review33 cited
  • 2017Inadvertent P‐hacking among trials and systematic reviews of the effect of progestogens in pregnancy? A systematic review and meta‐analysis32 cited
  • 2019Increasing value and reducing research waste in obstetrics: towards woman‐centered research22 cited

Cited by

  • 2024The usefulness of randomized trials of lifestyle interventions for overweight, obesity, or metabolic syndrome: A systematic review5 cited

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