243 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30621793)
21. A protocol for a systematic review of non-randomised evaluations of strategies to improve participant recruitment to randomised controlled trials.
Gardner HR; Fraser C; MacLennan G; Treweek S
Syst Rev; 2016 Aug; 5(1):131. PubMed ID: 27485111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Inter-review agreement of risk-of-bias judgments varied in Cochrane reviews.
Könsgen N; Barcot O; Heß S; Puljak L; Goossen K; Rombey T; Pieper D
J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Apr; 120():25-32. PubMed ID: 31866473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The risk of bias in randomized controlled trials in otorhinolaryngology: hardly any improvement since 1950.
Peters JPM; Stegeman I; Grolman W; Hooft L
BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord; 2017; 17():3. PubMed ID: 28428729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Quality Assessment of Studies Included in Cochrane Oral Health Systematic Reviews: A Meta-Research.
Sofi-Mahmudi A; Iranparvar P; Shakiba M; Shamsoddin E; Mohammad-Rahimi H; Naseri S; Motie P; Tovani-Palone MR; Mesgarpour B
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2021 Jul; 18(14):. PubMed ID: 34299733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Use and reporting of risk of bias tools in 825 systematic reviews of acupuncture: a cross-sectional study.
Long Y; Wang X; Xiao W; Chen R; Guo Q; Liu J; Shao R; Huang J; Du L
Acupunct Med; 2021 Aug; 39(4):318-326. PubMed ID: 32811166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Methodological quality and risk-of-bias assessments in systematic reviews of treatments for peri-implantitis.
Hasuike A; Ueno D; Nagashima H; Kubota T; Tsukune N; Watanabe N; Sato S
J Periodontal Res; 2019 Aug; 54(4):374-387. PubMed ID: 30671962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Overall bias methods and their use in sensitivity analysis of Cochrane reviews were not consistent.
Babic A; Vuka I; Saric F; Proloscic I; Slapnicar E; Cavar J; Poklepovic Pericic T; Pieper D; Puljak L
J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Mar; 119():57-64. PubMed ID: 31734347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Practicalities of using a modified version of the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool for randomised and non-randomised study designs applied in a health technology assessment setting.
Robertson C; Ramsay C; Gurung T; Mowatt G; Pickard R; Sharma P;
Res Synth Methods; 2014 Sep; 5(3):200-11. PubMed ID: 26052846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials.
Kunz R; Vist G; Oxman AD
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2007 Apr; (2):MR000012. PubMed ID: 17443633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [Application of the Risk of Bias 2 Tool].
Lee LL
Hu Li Za Zhi; 2021 Apr; 68(2):85-91. PubMed ID: 33792022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Appraisal of systematic reviews on the management of peri-implant diseases with two methodological tools.
Faggion CM; Monje A; Wasiak J
J Clin Periodontol; 2018 Jun; 45(6):754-766. PubMed ID: 29575189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. In Cochrane reviews, risk of bias assessments for allocation concealment were frequently not in line with Cochrane's Handbook guidance.
Propadalo I; Tranfic M; Vuka I; Barcot O; Pericic TP; Puljak L
J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Feb; 106():10-17. PubMed ID: 30312657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Quality of reporting and risk of bias: a review of randomised trials in occupational health.
Tikka C; Verbeek J; Ijaz S; Hoving JL; Boschman J; Hulshof C; de Boer AG
Occup Environ Med; 2021 Sep; 78(9):691-696. PubMed ID: 34162718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. 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]
36. 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]
37. Methodological tools and sensitivity analysis for assessing quality or risk of bias used in systematic reviews published in the high-impact anesthesiology journals.
Marušić MF; Fidahić M; Cepeha CM; Farcaș LG; Tseke A; Puljak L
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 May; 20(1):121. PubMed ID: 32423382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Methodological quality and risk of bias in orthodontic systematic reviews using AMSTAR and ROBIS.
Hooper EJ; Pandis N; Cobourne MT; Seehra J
Eur J Orthod; 2021 Oct; 43(5):544-550. PubMed ID: 33723612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Red blood cell transfusion to treat or prevent complications in sickle cell disease: an overview of Cochrane reviews.
Fortin PM; Hopewell S; Estcourt LJ
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2018 Aug; 8(8):CD012082. PubMed ID: 30067867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Risk of bias tool in systematic reviews/meta-analyses of acupuncture in Chinese journals.
Liu Y; Yang S; Dai J; Xu Y; Zhang R; Jiang H; Yan X; Yang K
PLoS One; 2011; 6(12):e28130. PubMed ID: 22174772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
