SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Systematic reviews on the same topic are common but often fail to meet key methodological standards: a research-on-research study
11 references·1 citing·47 second hop
Systematic reviews on the same topic are common but often fail to meet key methodological standards: a research-on-research study (2025)Systematic reviews on the same topic are …Living Systematic Reviews (2021)Living Systematic ReviewsHigh variability in results and methodological quality among overlapping systematic reviews on the same topics in surgery: a meta-epidemiological study (2021)High variability in results a…An epidemic of redundant meta‐analyses (2021)An epidemic of redundant meta…Meta-Analysis (2020)Meta-AnalysisDiscrepancies in meta-analyses answering the same clinical question were hard to explain: a meta-epidemiological study (2019)Discrepancies in meta-analyse…The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)The Mass Production of Redund…ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed (2015)ROBIS: A new tool to assess r…How to Read a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis and Apply the Results to Patient Care (2014)How to Read a Systematic Revi…Overlapping meta-analyses on the same topic: survey of published studies (2013)Overlapping meta-analyses on …The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)The Cochrane Collaboration's …The scandal of poor medical research (1994)The scandal of poor medical r…The value of living systematic reviews (2026)The value of living systemati…Methodology and overt and hidden bias in reports of 196 double-blind trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritis (1989)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Reflections on the Decline of Science in England (1830) (2024)Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials (2001)Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies (2008)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)Two new Later Stone Age sites from the Final Pleistocene in the Falémé Valley, eastern Senegal (2024)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)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)Thresholds for statistical and clinical significance in systematic reviews with meta-analytic methods (2014)Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study (2016)New evidence pyramid (2016)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)How to Make More Published Research True (2014)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)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)SANRA—a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles (2019)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Evaluation of various estimators for standardized mean difference in meta‐analysis (2020)Assessing the robustness of results from clinical trials and meta-analyses with the fragility index (2022)Sensitivity analysis with iterative outlier detection for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses (2024)Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (2008)Replication of systematic reviews: is it to the benefit or detriment of methodological quality? (2023)Risk of drug use during pregnancy: master protocol for living systematic reviews and meta-analyses performed in the metaPreg project (2023)Intelligent summaries: Will Artificial Intelligence mark the finale for biomedical literature reviews? (2024)Trial sequential analysis may establish when firm evidence is reached in cumulative meta-analysis (2007)Estimating required information size by quantifying diversity in random-effects model meta-analyses (2009)A scoping review of rapid review methods (2015)Living network meta-analysis compared with pairwise meta-analysis in comparative effectiveness research: empirical study (2018)Using Trial Sequential Analysis for estimating the sample sizes of further trials: example using smoking cessation intervention (2020)Collaborative large language models for automated data extraction in living systematic reviews (2025)Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis (2002)Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (2011)A meta-analysis on the effect of technology on the achievement of less advantaged students (2024)Exploring the Impact of Meta-Analysis in Scientific Research: A Review (2024)Literature Review in Scientific Research: An Overview (2024)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2011The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials33,820 cited
  • 2015ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed2,287 cited
  • 2016The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses1,499 cited
  • 1994The scandal of poor medical research897 cited
  • 2014How to Read a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis and Apply the Results to Patient Care465 cited
  • 2013Overlapping meta-analyses on the same topic: survey of published studies252 cited
  • 2020Meta-Analysis141 cited
  • 2021Living Systematic Reviews66 cited
  • 2019Discrepancies in meta-analyses answering the same clinical question were hard to explain: a meta-epidemiological study41 cited
  • 2021An epidemic of redundant meta‐analyses28 cited
  • 2021High variability in results and methodological quality among overlapping systematic reviews on the same topics in surgery: a meta-epidemiological study24 cited

Cited by

  • 2026The value of living systematic reviews6 cited

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