References

• 2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement84,364 cited
• 2011The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials33,820 cited
• 2012Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic19,996 cited
• 1996Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?17,580 cited
• 2017AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both10,856 cited
• 1998The Delphi List2,426 cited
• 2017The COMET Handbook: version 1.02,021 cited
• 2010The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews1,133 cited
• 2020Assessing the quality of studies in meta‐research: Review/guidelines on the most important quality assessment tools247 cited
• 2019The Evidence Project risk of bias tool: assessing study rigor for both randomized and non-randomized intervention studies214 cited
• 2016Core outcome sets and systematic reviews205 cited
• 2004Identification and impact of outcome selection bias in meta‐analysis133 cited
• 2017Multiple outcomes and analyses in clinical trials create challenges for interpretation and research synthesis132 cited
• 2000Assessing the potential for bias in meta-analysis due to selective reporting of subgroup analyses within studies