356 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18411041)
1. The reporting quality of meta-analyses improves: a random sampling study.
Wen J; Ren Y; Wang L; Li Y; Liu Y; Zhou M; Liu P; Ye L; Li Y; Tian W
J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Aug; 61(8):770-5. PubMed ID: 18411041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.
Manchikanti L; Datta S; Smith HS; Hirsch JA
Pain Physician; 2009; 12(5):819-50. PubMed ID: 19787009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Scope for improvement in the quality of reporting of systematic reviews. From the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group.
Shea B; Bouter LM; Grimshaw JM; Francis D; Ortiz Z; Wells GA; Tugwell PS; Boers M
J Rheumatol; 2006 Jan; 33(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 16267878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Assessing the reporting and scientific quality of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials of treatments for anxiety disorders.
Bereza BG; Machado M; Einarson TR
Ann Pharmacother; 2008 Oct; 42(10):1402-9. PubMed ID: 18728102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. QUOROM Group.
Moher D; Cook DJ; Eastwood S; Olkin I; Rennie D; Stroup DF
Br J Surg; 2000 Nov; 87(11):1448-54. PubMed ID: 11091231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM Statement].
Moher D; Cook DJ; Eastwood S; Olkin I; Rennie D; Stroup DF
Rev Esp Salud Publica; 2000; 74(2):107-18. PubMed ID: 10918802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evidence of improving quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in subfertility.
Dias S; McNamee R; Vail A
Hum Reprod; 2006 Oct; 21(10):2617-27. PubMed ID: 16793995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A simplified search strategy for identifying randomised controlled trials for systematic reviews of health care interventions: a comparison with more exhaustive strategies.
Royle P; Waugh N
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2005 Jul; 5():23. PubMed ID: 16042789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Quality appraisal of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of pneumonia in China].
Hou ZK; Li JS; Yu XQ; Li B; Zhou HY; Zhang YX
Zhongguo Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue; 2009 Apr; 21(4):207-10. PubMed ID: 19374786
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quality assessment of meta-analyses of RCTs of pharmacotherapy in major depressive disorder.
Hemels ME; Vicente C; Sadri H; Masson MJ; Einarson TR
Curr Med Res Opin; 2004 Apr; 20(4):477-84. PubMed ID: 15119985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The quality of reports of critical care meta-analyses in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: an independent appraisal.
Delaney A; Bagshaw SM; Ferland A; Laupland K; Manns B; Doig C
Crit Care Med; 2007 Feb; 35(2):589-94. PubMed ID: 17205029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Adjustment of meta-analyses on the basis of quality scores should be abandoned.
Herbison P; Hay-Smith J; Gillespie WJ
J Clin Epidemiol; 2006 Dec; 59(12):1249-56. PubMed ID: 17098567
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Compliance with QUOROM and quality of reporting of overlapping meta-analyses on the role of acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast associated nephropathy: case study.
Biondi-Zoccai GG; Lotrionte M; Abbate A; Testa L; Remigi E; Burzotta F; Valgimigli M; Romagnoli E; Crea F; Agostoni P
BMJ; 2006 Jan; 332(7535):202-9. PubMed ID: 16415336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Does a "Level I Evidence" rating imply high quality of reporting in orthopaedic randomised controlled trials?
Poolman RW; Struijs PA; Krips R; Sierevelt IN; Lutz KH; Bhandari M
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2006 Sep; 6():44. PubMed ID: 16965628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Analysis of the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in acute and chronic myeloid leukemia, and myelodysplastic syndromes as governed by the CONSORT statement.
Ziogas DC; Zintzaras E
Ann Epidemiol; 2009 Jul; 19(7):494-500. PubMed ID: 19523596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. CONSORT and QUOROM guidelines for reporting randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews.
Turpin DL
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Dec; 128(6):681-5; discussion 686. PubMed ID: 16360902
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. A systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in the critical care literature.
Delaney A; Bagshaw SM; Ferland A; Manns B; Laupland KB; Doig CJ
Crit Care; 2005 Oct; 9(5):R575-82. PubMed ID: 16277721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Does updating improve the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews?
Shea B; Boers M; Grimshaw JM; Hamel C; Bouter LM
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2006 Jun; 6():27. PubMed ID: 16772030
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Improvement in the quality of randomized controlled trials among general anesthesiology journals 2000 to 2006: a 6-year follow-up.
Greenfield ML; Mhyre JM; Mashour GA; Blum JM; Yen EC; Rosenberg AL
Anesth Analg; 2009 Jun; 108(6):1916-21. PubMed ID: 19448222
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. An analysis of systematic reviews indicated low incorpororation of results from clinical trial quality assessment.
de Craen AJ; van Vliet HA; Helmerhorst FM
J Clin Epidemiol; 2005 Mar; 58(3):311-3. PubMed ID: 15718121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
