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.
90 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26774825)
21. Efficacy and Safety Outcome Domains and Outcome Measures in Systematic Reviews of Neuropathic Pain Conditions. Dosenovic S; Jelicic Kadic A; Jeric M; Boric M; Markovic D; Vucic K; Puljak L Clin J Pain; 2018 Jul; 34(7):674-684. PubMed ID: 29252868 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Effect of reporting bias on meta-analyses of drug trials: reanalysis of meta-analyses. Hart B; Lundh A; Bero L BMJ; 2012 Jan; 344():d7202. PubMed ID: 22214754 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in infectious diseases: topics that merit special attention. Leibovici L; Yahav D; Paul M Clin Microbiol Infect; 2014 Feb; 20(2):101-4. PubMed ID: 24329938 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Discordances originated by multiple meta-analyses on interventions for myocardial infarction: a systematic review. Lucenteforte E; Moja L; Pecoraro V; Conti AA; Conti A; Crudeli E; Galli A; Gensini GF; Minnelli M; Mugelli A; Proietti R; Shtylla J; D'Amico R; Parmelli E; Virgili G J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Mar; 68(3):246-56. PubMed ID: 25533151 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Systematic review, meta-analysis and randomized controlled trials in cytopathology. AbdullGaffar B Acta Cytol; 2012; 56(3):221-7. PubMed ID: 22555521 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Effectiveness of interventions that assist caregivers to support people with dementia living in the community: a systematic review. Parker D; Mills S; Abbey J Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2008 Jun; 6(2):137-72. PubMed ID: 21631819 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Survey of the reporting characteristics of systematic reviews in rehabilitation. Gianola S; Gasparini M; Agostini M; Castellini G; Corbetta D; Gozzer P; Li LC; Sirtori V; Taricco M; Tetzlaff JM; Turolla A; Moher D; Moja L Phys Ther; 2013 Nov; 93(11):1456-66. PubMed ID: 23744458 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Flaws in the application and interpretation of statistical analyses in systematic reviews of therapeutic interventions were common: a cross-sectional analysis. Page MJ; Altman DG; McKenzie JE; Shamseer L; Ahmadzai N; Wolfe D; Yazdi F; Catalá-López F; Tricco AC; Moher D J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Mar; 95():7-18. PubMed ID: 29203419 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Errors in the conduct of systematic reviews of pharmacological interventions for irritable bowel syndrome. Ford AC; Guyatt GH; Talley NJ; Moayyedi P Am J Gastroenterol; 2010 Feb; 105(2):280-8. PubMed ID: 19920807 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [Systematic reviews in practice. VIII. Searching and assessing systematic reviews]. Assendelft WJ; Scholten RJ; Hoving JL; Offringa M; Bouter LM Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2001 Aug; 145(34):1625-31. PubMed ID: 11552363 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Use of quality assessment tools in systematic reviews was varied and inconsistent. Seehra J; Pandis N; Koletsi D; Fleming PS J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Jan; 69():179-84.e5. PubMed ID: 26151664 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Reporting of systematic reviews of micronutrients and health: a critical appraisal. Chung M; Balk EM; Ip S; Raman G; Yu WW; Trikalinos TA; Lichtenstein AH; Yetley EA; Lau J Am J Clin Nutr; 2009 Apr; 89(4):1099-113. PubMed ID: 19244363 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. A systematic review of core outcome set development studies demonstrates difficulties in defining unique outcomes. Young AE; Brookes ST; Avery KNL; Davies A; Metcalfe C; Blazeby JM J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Nov; 115():14-24. PubMed ID: 31276780 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Definition of a systematic review used in overviews of systematic reviews, meta-epidemiological studies and textbooks. Krnic Martinic M; Pieper D; Glatt A; Puljak L BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Nov; 19(1):203. PubMed ID: 31684874 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. A third of systematic reviews changed or did not specify the primary outcome: a PROSPERO register study. Tricco AC; Cogo E; Page MJ; Polisena J; Booth A; Dwan K; MacDonald H; Clifford TJ; Stewart LA; Straus SE; Moher D J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Nov; 79():46-54. PubMed ID: 27079845 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Authors seldom report the most patient-important outcomes and absolute effect measures in systematic review abstracts. Agarwal A; Johnston BC; Vernooij RW; Carrasco-Labra A; Brignardello-Petersen R; Neumann I; Akl EA; Sun X; Briel M; Busse JW; Ebrahim S; Granados CE; Iorio A; Irfan A; Martínez García L; Mustafa RA; Ramirez-Morera A; Selva A; Solà I; Sanabrai AJ; Tikkinen KA; Vandvik PO; Zhang Y; Zazueta OE; Zhou Q; Schunemann HJ; Guyatt GH; Alonso-Coello P J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Jan; 81():3-12. PubMed ID: 27555080 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Current trends, barriers, and facilitators of use of core outcome sets in Cochrane systematic reviews: Protocol. Saldanha I; Hughes K; Dodd S; Lasserson T; Kirkham J; Lucas S; Williamson P F1000Res; 2023; 12():735. PubMed ID: 39399297 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Issues related to the conduct of systematic reviews: a focus on the nutrition field. Moher D; Tricco AC Am J Clin Nutr; 2008 Nov; 88(5):1191-9. PubMed ID: 18996852 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. From narrative to systematic reviews and meta-analyses in assessing the effectiveness of psychiatric treatments. Tansella M Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc; 2003; 12(3):135-6. PubMed ID: 14610847 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]