SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
An assessment of research methods reported in 103 scientific articles from two Canadian medical journals.
0 references·8 citing·37 second hop
An assessment of research methods reported in 103 scientific articles from two Canadian medical journals. (1961)An assessment of research methods reporte…A Critical Appraisal of Standard Guidelines for Grading Levels of Evidence (2010)A Critical Appraisal of Stand…Statistics in the Pharmacy Literature (2004)Statistics in the Pharmacy Li…Publication of clinical trials: accountability and accessibility (2004)Publication of clinical trial…Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: Quality of design is not the only relevant variable (1999)Assessing the quality of rand…Impact of random assignment on study outcome: An empirical examination (1992)Impact of random assignment o…Publications on clinical trials with X-ray contrast media: differences in quality between journals and decades (1990)Publications on clinical tria…Peer Review in Medical Journals (1987)Peer Review in Medical Journa…An evaluation of the quality of therapeutic studies in perinatal medicine (1983)An evaluation of the quality …Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)Ethical Considerations in the Interpretation and Communication of Clinical Trial Results (2007)Authorship and Ethical Considerations in the Conduct of Observational Studies (2009)A systematic review of clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke (1955-2008) that were completed, but not published in full (2010)Clinical Research in General Medical Journals (1979)Quality of Clinical Trials — A Concern of Three Decades (1982)Quality assessment of randomized controlled trials of contrast media. (1989)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement (1996)Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? (1998)Cross‐sectional study of the quality of randomized control trials on problem‐based learning in medical education (2022)A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial (1981)Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis (1985)Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis (1988)Rating Methodological Quality: Toward Improved Assessment and Investigation (2005)Effect of methodological quality measures in spinal surgery research: a metaepidemiological study (2012)Statistical Evaluation of Medical Journal Manuscripts (1966)Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again (1982)A Difficult Balance: Editorial Peer Review in Medicine (1992)Editorial peer review: Let us put it on trial (1992)More Peering Into Editorial Peer Review (1993)Peer review (2014)Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory (1986)Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research Designs (2000)Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies (2008)An Application of a New Evidence Grading System to Research on the Chronic Care Model (2012)Defiance and Motivational Postures (2013)A Critical Review of Grading Systems: Implications for Public Health Policy (2016)Experimenter Effects in Behavioral Research (1968)Chance and Consensus in Peer Review (1981)Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials: why bother? (2000)Incorporating allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials (2000)Evaluating the evidence for evidence‐based medicine: are randomized clinical trials less flawed than other forms of peer‐reviewed medical research? (2013)Reporting quality of survey research articles published in the pharmacy literature (2020)Meta-research in pharmacy: Time for a look in the mirror (2021)
this work references cited by second hop

References

No references inside the corpus for this window.

Cited by

  • 1992Impact of random assignment on study outcome: An empirical examination41 cited
  • 2010A Critical Appraisal of Standard Guidelines for Grading Levels of Evidence40 cited
  • 2004Publication of clinical trials: accountability and accessibility27 cited
  • 2004Statistics in the Pharmacy Literature25 cited
  • 1987Peer Review in Medical Journals25 cited
  • 1990Publications on clinical trials with X-ray contrast media: differences in quality between journals and decades12 cited
  • 1983An evaluation of the quality of therapeutic studies in perinatal medicine12 cited
  • 1999Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: Quality of design is not the only relevant variable11 cited

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