164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30445166)
1. The methodological quality of dose-response meta-analyses needed substantial improvement: a cross-sectional survey and proposed recommendations.
Xu C; Liu Y; Jia PL; Li L; Liu TZ; Cheng LL; Deng K; Borhan ASM; Thabane L; Sun X
J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Mar; 107():1-11. PubMed ID: 30445166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Reporting quality and statistical analysis of published dose-response meta-analyses was suboptimal: a cross-sectional literature survey.
Jiang Q; Liu Q; Chen F; Zeng X; Song F; Lu Z; Cao S
J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Nov; 115():133-140. PubMed ID: 31326542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessment of the abstract reporting of systematic reviews of dose-response meta-analysis: a literature survey.
Jia PL; Xu B; Cheng JM; Huang XH; Kwong JSW; Liu Y; Zhang C; Han Y; Xu C
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Jul; 19(1):148. PubMed ID: 31307388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Improving the quality of reporting of systematic reviews of dose-response meta-analyses: a cross-sectional survey.
Xu C; Liu TZ; Jia PL; Liu Y; Li L; Cheng LL; Sun X
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Nov; 18(1):157. PubMed ID: 30497389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Protocol registration or development may benefit the design, conduct and reporting of dose-response meta-analysis: empirical evidence from a literature survey.
Xu C; Cheng LL; Liu Y; Jia PL; Gao MY; Zhang C
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Apr; 19(1):78. PubMed ID: 30975073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. An overview on the methodological and reporting quality of dose-response meta-analysis on cancer prevention.
Xu C; Liu Y; Zhang C; Kwong JSW; Zhou JG; Ge L; Huang JY; Liu TZ
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol; 2019 May; 145(5):1201-1211. PubMed ID: 30863898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Improvement needed in the network geometry and inconsistency of Cochrane network meta-analyses: a cross-sectional survey.
Gao Y; Ge L; Ma X; Shen X; Liu M; Tian J
J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Sep; 113():214-227. PubMed ID: 31150834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Methodological and Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews Published in the Highest Ranking Journals in the Field of Pain.
Riado Minguez D; Kowalski M; Vallve Odena M; Longin Pontzen D; Jelicic Kadic A; Jeric M; Dosenovic S; Jakus D; Vrdoljak M; Poklepovic Pericic T; Sapunar D; Puljak L
Anesth Analg; 2017 Oct; 125(4):1348-1354. PubMed ID: 28678074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of methodological quality rating of systematic reviews on neuropathic pain using AMSTAR and R-AMSTAR.
Dosenovic S; Jelicic Kadic A; Vucic K; Markovina N; Pieper D; Puljak L
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 May; 18(1):37. PubMed ID: 29739339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The methodological quality of robotic surgical meta-analyses needed to be improved: a cross-sectional study.
Yan P; Yao L; Li H; Zhang M; Xun Y; Li M; Cai H; Lu C; Hu L; Guo T; Liu R; Yang K
J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 May; 109():20-29. PubMed ID: 30579979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Association between prospective registration and overall reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study.
Ge L; Tian JH; Li YN; Pan JX; Li G; Wei D; Xing X; Pan B; Chen YL; Song FJ; Yang KH
J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Jan; 93():45-55. PubMed ID: 29111471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Quality of meta-analyses in major leading orthopedics journals: A systematic review.
Zhi X; Zhang Z; Cui J; Zhai X; Chen X; Su J
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res; 2017 Dec; 103(8):1141-1146. PubMed ID: 28928047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. How is AMSTAR applied by authors - a call for better reporting.
Pieper D; Koensgen N; Breuing J; Ge L; Wegewitz U
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Jun; 18(1):56. PubMed ID: 29914386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Methodological quality assessment of paper-based systematic reviews published in oral health.
Wasiak J; Shen AY; Tan HB; Mahar R; Kan G; Khoo WR; Faggion CM
Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Apr; 20(3):399-431. PubMed ID: 26589200
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Abstract analysis method facilitates filtering low-methodological quality and high-bias risk systematic reviews on psoriasis interventions.
Gómez-García F; Ruano J; Aguilar-Luque M; Alcalde-Mellado P; Gay-Mimbrera J; Hernández-Romero JL; Sanz-Cabanillas JL; Maestre-López B; González-Padilla M; Carmona-Fernández PJ; García-Nieto AV; Isla-Tejera B
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Dec; 17(1):180. PubMed ID: 29284417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Methodological quality of meta-analyses of single-case experimental studies.
Jamshidi L; Heyvaert M; Declercq L; Fernández-Castilla B; Ferron JM; Moeyaert M; Beretvas SN; Onghena P; Van den Noortgate W
Res Dev Disabil; 2018 Aug; 79():97-115. PubMed ID: 29289406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on psoriasis: role of funding sources, conflict of interest and bibliometric indices as predictors of methodological quality.
Gómez-García F; Ruano J; Aguilar-Luque M; Gay-Mimbrera J; Maestre-Lopez B; Sanz-Cabanillas JL; Carmona-Fernández PJ; González-Padilla M; Vélez García-Nieto A; Isla-Tejera B
Br J Dermatol; 2017 Jun; 176(6):1633-1644. PubMed ID: 28192600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The reporting of safety among drug systematic reviews was poor before the implementation of the PRISMA harms checklist.
Li L; Xu C; Deng K; Zhou X; Liu Z; Busse JW; Ren Y; Zou K; Sun X
J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Jan; 105():125-135. PubMed ID: 30278212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Methodological Quality Assessment of Meta-analyses in Endodontics.
Kattan S; Lee SM; Kohli MR; Setzer FC; Karabucak B
J Endod; 2018 Jan; 44(1):22-31. PubMed ID: 29032820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
