SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Including non-randomized studies of interventions in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials changed the estimates in more than a third of the studies: evidence from an empirical analysis
14 references·0 citing·48 second hop
Including non-randomized studies of interventions in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials changed the estimates in more than a third of the studies: evidence from an empirical analysis (2025)Including non-randomized studies of inter…Inclusion of nonrandomized studies of interventions in systematic reviews of interventions: updated guidance from the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality Effective Health Care program (2022)Inclusion of nonrandomized st…Evaluating agreement between bodies of evidence from randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in medical research: a meta-epidemiological study (2022)Evaluating agreement between …GRADE guidance 24 optimizing the integration of randomized and non-randomized studies of interventions in evidence syntheses and health guidelines (2021)GRADE guidance 24 optimizing …The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2020)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an…Framework for the synthesis of non-randomised studies and randomised controlled trials: a guidance on conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis for healthcare decision making (2020)Framework for the synthesis o…A bias‐corrected meta‐analysis model for combining, studies of different types and quality (2020)A bias‐corrected meta‐analysi…Meta-analyses frequently pooled different study types together: a meta-epidemiological study (2019)Meta-analyses frequently pool…Guidelines for reporting meta-epidemiological methodology research (2017)Guidelines for reporting meta…The Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random effects meta-analysis is straightforward and considerably outperforms the standard DerSimonian-Laird method (2014)The Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkm…Combining randomized and non‐randomized evidence in clinical research: a review of methods and applications (2014)Combining randomized and non‐…Non‐randomized studies as a source of complementary, sequential or replacement evidence for randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions (2013)Non‐randomized studies as a s…Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses (2011)Interpretation of random effe…Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)Measuring inconsistency in me…Which clinical studies provide the best evidence? (2000)Which clinical studies provid…Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)A Re-Evaluation of Random-Effects Meta-Analysis (2008)Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta‐analysis (2010)The assessment and appraisal of regenerative medicines and cell therapy products: an exploration of methods for review, economic evaluation and appraisal (2017)Laughter-inducing therapies: Systematic review and meta-analysis (2019)Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews (2005)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Graphical Tools for Network Meta-Analysis in STATA (2013)The global prevalence of common mental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis 1980–2013 (2014)Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses (2019)The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials (1998)Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research Designs (2000)Assessing intervention effectiveness for reducing stress in student nurses: quantitative systematic review (2011)The GRACE Checklist: A Validated Assessment Tool for High Quality Observational Studies of Comparative Effectiveness (2016)Real world data: an opportunity to supplement existing evidence for the use of long-established medicines in health care decision making (2018)Meta-analysis in clinical trials (1986)Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis (2002)Meta-analysis in clinical trials revisited (2015)Plea for routinely presenting prediction intervals in meta-analysis (2016)Socioeconomic status and the 25 × 25 risk factors as determinants of premature mortality: a multicohort study and meta-analysis of 1·7 million men and women (2017)The Combination of Estimates from Different Experiments (1954)Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis (2001)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)External validity of randomised controlled trials: “To whom do the results of this trial apply?” (2005)Interpreting Results and Drawing Conclusions (2008)GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence—indirectness (2011)Improving GRADE evidence tables part 3: detailed guidance for explanatory footnotes supports creating and understanding GRADE certainty in the evidence judgments (2016)Combining randomized and non‐randomized evidence in network meta‐analysis (2017)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)Evaluation of the Endorsement of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Statement on the Quality of Published Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (2013)Rating the certainty in evidence in the absence of a single estimate of effect (2017)Agreement between the Cochrane risk of bias tool and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale: A meta-epidemiological study of randomized controlled trials of physical therapy interventions (2019)A tutorial on methodological studies: the what, when, how and why (2020)Assessment of publication bias and outcome reporting bias in systematic reviews of health services and delivery research: A meta-epidemiological study (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)Network Meta-Analysis Techniques for Synthesizing Prevention Science Evidence (2021)Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in regional anesthesia and pain medicine (Part II): guidelines for performing the systematic review (2023)Examining the role of AI technology in online mental healthcare: opportunities, challenges, and implications, a mixed-methods review (2024)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation (2015)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach (2018)Healthcare outcomes assessed with observational study designs compared with those assessed in randomized trials: a meta-epidemiological study (2024)Implementing GRADE in systematic reviews that adhere to JBI methodological conduct (2024)Core GRADE 6: presenting the evidence in summary of findings tables (2025)Implementing the 27 PRISMA 2020 Statement items for systematic reviews in the sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation and sports science fields: the PERSiST (implementing Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science) guidance (2021)Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement (2021)Strengthening systematic reviews in public health: guidance in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2nd edition (2022)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2003Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses63,086 cited
  • 2020The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews8,068 cited
  • 2011Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses2,872 cited
  • 2014The Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random effects meta-analysis is straightforward and considerably outperforms the standard DerSimonian-Laird method2,401 cited
  • 2017Guidelines for reporting meta-epidemiological methodology research514 cited
  • 2000Which clinical studies provide the best evidence?384 cited
  • 2013Non‐randomized studies as a source of complementary, sequential or replacement evidence for randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions248 cited
  • 2021GRADE guidance 24 optimizing the integration of randomized and non-randomized studies of interventions in evidence syntheses and health guidelines174 cited
  • 2014Combining randomized and non‐randomized evidence in clinical research: a review of methods and applications123 cited
  • 2020Framework for the synthesis of non-randomised studies and randomised controlled trials: a guidance on conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis for healthcare decision making117 cited
  • 2019Meta-analyses frequently pooled different study types together: a meta-epidemiological study68 cited
  • 2022Inclusion of nonrandomized studies of interventions in systematic reviews of interventions: updated guidance from the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality Effective Health Care program40 cited

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

  • 2020A bias‐corrected meta‐analysis model for combining, studies of different types and quality38 cited
  • 2022Evaluating agreement between bodies of evidence from randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in medical research: a meta-epidemiological study29 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.