These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
2. The quality of reporting of orthopaedic randomized trials with use of a checklist for nonpharmacological therapies. Chan S; Bhandari M J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2007 Sep; 89(9):1970-8. PubMed ID: 17768194 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reporting of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials with a focus on drug safety: an empirical assessment. Hammad TA; Neyarapally GA; Pinheiro SP; Iyasu S; Rochester G; Dal Pan G Clin Trials; 2013; 10(3):389-97. PubMed ID: 23508987 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of Registered and Published Primary Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials of Orthopaedic Surgical Interventions. Rongen JJ; Hannink G J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2016 Mar; 98(5):403-9. PubMed ID: 26935463 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in the orthopaedic literature. Gagnier JJ; Kellam PJ J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2013 Jun; 95(11):e771-7. PubMed ID: 23780547 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Lack of diversity in orthopaedic trials conducted in the United States. Somerson JS; Bhandari M; Vaughan CT; Smith CS; Zelle BA J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2014 Apr; 96(7):e56. PubMed ID: 24695933 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A critical assessment of the quality of reporting of randomized, controlled trials in the urology literature. Scales CD; Norris RD; Keitz SA; Peterson BL; Preminger GM; Vieweg J; Dahm P J Urol; 2007 Mar; 177(3):1090-4; discussion 1094-5. PubMed ID: 17296417 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An evaluation of the quality of statistical design and analysis of published medical research: results from a systematic survey of general orthopaedic journals. Parsons NR; Price CL; Hiskens R; Achten J; Costa ML BMC Med Res Methodol; 2012 Apr; 12():60. PubMed ID: 22533688 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Intention-to-treat analysis and accounting for missing data in orthopaedic randomized clinical trials. Herman A; Botser IB; Tenenbaum S; Chechick A J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2009 Sep; 91(9):2137-43. PubMed ID: 19723990 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reporting of adverse events in surgical trials: critical appraisal of current practice. Rosenthal R; Hoffmann H; Dwan K; Clavien PA; Bucher HC World J Surg; 2015 Jan; 39(1):80-7. PubMed ID: 25201471 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials of pharmacologic treatment of bipolar disorders: a systematic review. Strech D; Soltmann B; Weikert B; Bauer M; Pfennig A J Clin Psychiatry; 2011 Sep; 72(9):1214-21. PubMed ID: 21294992 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Improving the quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery: the way forward. Tiruvoipati R; Balasubramanian SP; Atturu G; Peek GJ; Elbourne D J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2006 Aug; 132(2):233-40. PubMed ID: 16872940 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]