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.
239 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30716451)
1. Systematic reviews in dentistry: Current status, epidemiological and reporting characteristics. Bassani R; Pereira GKR; Page MJ; Tricco AC; Moher D; Sarkis-Onofre R J Dent; 2019 Mar; 82():71-84. PubMed ID: 30716451 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Protocol registration improves reporting quality of systematic reviews in dentistry. Dos Santos MBF; Agostini BA; Bassani R; Pereira GKR; Sarkis-Onofre R BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Mar; 20(1):57. PubMed ID: 32160871 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review. Page MJ; Moher D Syst Rev; 2017 Dec; 6(1):263. PubMed ID: 29258593 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Reporting Quality of Abstracts in Systematic Reviews in Orthodontics: An Observational Study. Alharbi F; Alghabban RO J Contemp Dent Pract; 2024 May; 25(5):459-462. PubMed ID: 39364845 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Otorhinolaryngologic Articles Based on the PRISMA Statement. Peters JP; Hooft L; Grolman W; Stegeman I PLoS One; 2015; 10(8):e0136540. PubMed ID: 26317406 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessment of the quality of reporting in abstracts of systematic reviews with meta-analyses in periodontology and implant dentistry. Faggion CM; Liu J; Huda F; Atieh M J Periodontal Res; 2014 Apr; 49(2):137-42. PubMed ID: 23668725 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Quality of abstract of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric dentistry journals. Pulikkotil SJ; Jayaraman J; Nagendrababu V Eur Arch Paediatr Dent; 2019 Oct; 20(5):383-391. PubMed ID: 30887462 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The search and selection for primary studies in systematic reviews published in dental journals indexed in MEDLINE was not fully reproducible. Faggion CM; Huivin R; Aranda L; Pandis N; Alarcon M J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Jun; 98():53-61. PubMed ID: 29476922 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Analysis of risk of bias assessments in a sample of intervention systematic reviews, part I: many aspects of conduct and reporting need improvement. Kolaski K; Clarke M; Rathnayake D; Romeiser Logan L J Clin Epidemiol; 2024 Oct; 174():111480. PubMed ID: 39047919 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. Moher D; Tetzlaff J; Tricco AC; Sampson M; Altman DG PLoS Med; 2007 Mar; 4(3):e78. PubMed ID: 17388659 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A systematic review of the quality of distal radius systematic reviews: Methodology and reporting assessment. Belloti JC; Okamura A; Scheeren J; Faloppa F; Ynoe de Moraes V PLoS One; 2019; 14(1):e0206895. PubMed ID: 30673700 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Endorsement of PRISMA statement and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in nursing journals: a cross-sectional study. Tam WW; Lo KK; Khalechelvam P BMJ Open; 2017 Feb; 7(2):e013905. PubMed ID: 28174224 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of PRISMA 2009 on reporting quality in systematic reviews and meta-analyses in high-impact dental medicine journals between 1993-2018. Sewell KA; Schellinger J; Bloss JE PLoS One; 2023; 18(12):e0295864. PubMed ID: 38096136 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Characteristics and completeness of reporting of systematic reviews of prevalence studies in adult populations: a metaresearch study. Buitrago-Garcia D; Robles-Rodriguez WG; Eslava-Schmalbach J; Salanti G; Low N J Clin Epidemiol; 2024 Oct; 174():111489. PubMed ID: 39089422 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study. Page MJ; Shamseer L; Altman DG; Tetzlaff J; Sampson M; Tricco AC; Catalá-López F; Li L; Reid EK; Sarkis-Onofre R; Moher D PLoS Med; 2016 May; 13(5):e1002028. PubMed ID: 27218655 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluating characteristics of PROSPERO records as predictors of eventual publication of non-Cochrane systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study protocol. Ruano J; Gómez-García F; Gay-Mimbrera J; Aguilar-Luque M; Fernández-Rueda JL; Fernández-Chaichio J; Alcalde-Mellado P; Carmona-Fernandez PJ; Sanz-Cabanillas JL; Viguera-Guerra I; Franco-García F; Cárdenas-Aranzana M; Romero JLH; Gonzalez-Padilla M; Isla-Tejera B; Garcia-Nieto AV Syst Rev; 2018 Mar; 7(1):43. PubMed ID: 29523200 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Mapping of reporting guidance for systematic reviews and meta-analyses generated a comprehensive item bank for future reporting guidelines. Page MJ; McKenzie JE; Bossuyt PM; Boutron I; Hoffmann T; Mulrow CD; Shamseer L; Moher D J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Feb; 118():60-68. PubMed ID: 31740319 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]