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.
208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32416337)
21. Assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses available for bovine and equine veterinarians and quality of abstract reporting: A scoping review. Buczinski S; Ferraro S; Vandeweerd JM Prev Vet Med; 2018 Dec; 161():50-59. PubMed ID: 30466658 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Inter-rater reliability and validity of risk of bias instrument for non-randomized studies of exposures: a study protocol. Jeyaraman MM; Al-Yousif N; Robson RC; Copstein L; Balijepalli C; Hofer K; Fazeli MS; Ansari MT; Tricco AC; Rabbani R; Abou-Setta AM Syst Rev; 2020 Feb; 9(1):32. PubMed ID: 32051035 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Inter-rater reliability of AMSTAR is dependent on the pair of reviewers. Pieper D; Jacobs A; Weikert B; Fishta A; Wegewitz U BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Jul; 17(1):98. PubMed ID: 28693497 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. 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]
25. A Critical Overview of Systematic Reviews of Chemotherapy for Advanced and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer using both AMSTAR2 and ROBIS as Quality Assessment Tools. Dang A; Chidirala S; Veeranki P; Vallish BN Rev Recent Clin Trials; 2021; 16(2):180-192. PubMed ID: 32875987 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR). Shea BJ; Bouter LM; Peterson J; Boers M; Andersson N; Ortiz Z; Ramsay T; Bai A; Shukla VK; Grimshaw JM PLoS One; 2007 Dec; 2(12):e1350. PubMed ID: 18159233 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Integration of care for hypertension and diabetes: a scoping review assessing the evidence from systematic reviews and evaluating reporting. Yiu KC; Rohwer A; Young T BMC Health Serv Res; 2018 Jun; 18(1):481. PubMed ID: 29925356 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies? Pieper D; Mathes T; Eikermann M BMC Res Notes; 2014 Sep; 7():609. PubMed ID: 25193554 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity of ROBINS-I: protocol for a cross-sectional study. Jeyaraman MM; Rabbani R; Al-Yousif N; Robson RC; Copstein L; Xia J; Pollock M; Mansour S; Ansari MT; Tricco AC; Abou-Setta AM Syst Rev; 2020 Jan; 9(1):12. PubMed ID: 31931871 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Intra-articular platelet-rich plasma injections for knee osteoarthritis: An overview of systematic reviews and risk of bias considerations. Xing D; Wang B; Zhang W; Yang Z; Hou Y; Chen Y; Lin J Int J Rheum Dis; 2017 Nov; 20(11):1612-1630. PubMed ID: 29210206 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. [Assessment of reliability and validity of assessment of multiple systematic reviews in Chinese systematic reviews on stomatology]. Su N; Lü J; Li C; Chen L; Shi Z Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2013 Feb; 31(1):49-52. PubMed ID: 23484302 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. The quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses published in the field of bariatrics: A cross-sectional systematic survey using AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS. Storman M; Storman D; Jasinska KW; Swierz MJ; Bala MM Obes Rev; 2020 May; 21(5):e12994. PubMed ID: 31997545 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Safety of intra-articular steroid injections prior to arthroplasty: Best evidence selection and risk of bias considerations. Li H; Xing D; Ke Y; Lin J Int J Rheum Dis; 2018 May; 21(5):982-991. PubMed ID: 29878619 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The Evidence Project risk of bias tool: assessing study rigor for both randomized and non-randomized intervention studies. Kennedy CE; Fonner VA; Armstrong KA; Denison JA; Yeh PT; O'Reilly KR; Sweat MD Syst Rev; 2019 Jan; 8(1):3. PubMed ID: 30606262 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Systematic review found AMSTAR, but not R(evised)-AMSTAR, to have good measurement properties. Pieper D; Buechter RB; Li L; Prediger B; Eikermann M J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 May; 68(5):574-83. PubMed ID: 25638457 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Are systematic reviews addressing nutrition for cancer prevention trustworthy? A systematic survey of quality and risk of bias. Zajac JF; Storman D; Swierz MJ; Koperny M; Weglarz P; Staskiewicz W; Gorecka M; Skuza A; Wach A; Kaluzinska K; Bochenek-Cibor J; Johnston BC; Bala MM Nutr Rev; 2022 May; 80(6):1558-1567. PubMed ID: 34921318 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. 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]
39. Ensuring rigor in systematic reviews: Part 7, critical appraisal of systematic review quality. Brackett A; Batten J Heart Lung; 2022; 53():32-35. PubMed ID: 35124337 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]