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.
210 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29224503)
1. Cochrane's risk of bias tool in the context of psychotherapy outcome research. Munder T; Barth J Psychother Res; 2018 May; 28(3):347-355. PubMed ID: 29224503 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Risk of bias and magnitude of effect in orthodontic randomized controlled trials: a meta-epidemiological review. Koletsi D; Spineli LM; Lempesi E; Pandis N Eur J Orthod; 2016 Jun; 38(3):308-12. PubMed ID: 26174770 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A meta-epidemiological study to examine the association between bias and treatment effects in neonatal trials. Bialy L; Vandermeer B; Lacaze-Masmonteil T; Dryden DM; Hartling L Evid Based Child Health; 2014 Dec; 9(4):1052-9. PubMed ID: 25504975 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials of Moxibustion Using STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Moxibustion (STRICTOM) and Risk of Bias (ROB). Kim SY; Lee EJ; Jeon JH; Kim JH; Jung IC; Kim YI J Acupunct Meridian Stud; 2017 Aug; 10(4):261-275. PubMed ID: 28889843 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Usability and sensitivity of the risk of bias assessment tool for randomized controlled trials of pharmacist interventions. Tonin FS; Lopes LA; Rotta I; Bonetti AF; Pontarolo R; Correr CJ; Fernandez-Llimos F Int J Clin Pharm; 2019 Jun; 41(3):785-792. PubMed ID: 30963446 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluating the Risk of Bias of a Study. Faggion CM J Evid Based Dent Pract; 2015 Dec; 15(4):164-70. PubMed ID: 26698002 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
9. Risk of bias in randomized trials of pharmacological interventions in children and adults. Sinha YK; Craig JC; Sureshkumar P; Hayen A; Brien JA J Pediatr; 2014 Aug; 165(2):367-371.e1. PubMed ID: 24814415 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quality of Reporting Randomized Controlled Trials in Five Leading Neurology Journals in 2008 and 2013 Using the Modified "Risk of Bias" Tool. Zhai X; Cui J; Wang Y; Qu Z; Mu Q; Li P; Zhang C; Yang M; Chen X; Chen Z; Li M World Neurosurg; 2017 Mar; 99():687-694.e7. PubMed ID: 28089838 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Inclusion and exclusion strategies for conducting meta-analyses. Swift JK; Wampold BE Psychother Res; 2018 May; 28(3):356-366. PubMed ID: 29169303 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Researcher allegiance in research on psychosocial interventions: meta-research study protocol and pilot study. Yoder WR; Karyotaki E; Cristea IA; van Duin D; Cuijpers P BMJ Open; 2019 Feb; 9(2):e024622. PubMed ID: 30782912 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effects of cognitive therapy versus interpersonal psychotherapy in patients with major depressive disorder: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses. Jakobsen JC; Hansen JL; Simonsen S; Simonsen E; Gluud C Psychol Med; 2012 Jul; 42(7):1343-57. PubMed ID: 22051174 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Avoidable waste related to inadequate methods and incomplete reporting of interventions: a systematic review of randomized trials performed in Sub-Saharan Africa. Ndounga Diakou LA; Ntoumi F; Ravaud P; Boutron I Trials; 2017 Jul; 18(1):291. PubMed ID: 28676066 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Is the evaluation of risk of bias in periodontology and implant dentistry comprehensive? A systematic review. Faggion CM; Listl S; Alarcón MA J Clin Periodontol; 2015 May; 42(5):488-94. PubMed ID: 25809114 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials: focus groups, online survey, proposed recommendations and their implementation. Savović J; Weeks L; Sterne JA; Turner L; Altman DG; Moher D; Higgins JP Syst Rev; 2014 Apr; 3():37. PubMed ID: 24731537 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Risk of bias assessments for blinding of participants and personnel in Cochrane reviews were frequently inadequate. Barcot O; Boric M; Dosenovic S; Poklepovic Pericic T; Cavar M; Puljak L J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Sep; 113():104-113. PubMed ID: 31132470 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Cochrane risk of bias tool was used inadequately in the majority of non-Cochrane systematic reviews. Puljak L; Ramic I; Arriola Naharro C; Brezova J; Lin YC; Surdila AA; Tomajkova E; Farias Medeiros I; Nikolovska M; Poklepovic Pericic T; Barcot O; Suarez Salvado M J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Jul; 123():114-119. PubMed ID: 32247026 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessing the risk of performance and detection bias in Cochrane reviews as a joint domain is less accurate compared to two separate domains. Barcot O; Boric M; Dosenovic S; Puljak L BMC Med Res Methodol; 2021 Jul; 21(1):149. PubMed ID: 34275437 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]