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.
6. Systematic reviewers commonly contact study authors but do so with limited rigor. Mullan RJ; Flynn DN; Carlberg B; Tleyjeh IM; Kamath CC; LaBella ML; Erwin PJ; Guyatt GH; Montori VM J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Feb; 62(2):138-42. PubMed ID: 19013767 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses: asking authors, peer reviewers, editors and funders to do better]. Moher D; Liberati A Med Clin (Barc); 2010 Oct; 135(11):505-6. PubMed ID: 20462608 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. Tricco AC; Lillie E; Zarin W; O'Brien K; Colquhoun H; Kastner M; Levac D; Ng C; Sharpe JP; Wilson K; Kenny M; Warren R; Wilson C; Stelfox HT; Straus SE BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Feb; 16():15. PubMed ID: 26857112 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Judgment, resources, and complexity: a qualitative study of the experiences of systematic reviewers of health promotion. Shepherd J Eval Health Prof; 2013 Jun; 36(2):247-67. PubMed ID: 22615497 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Tutorial for writing systematic reviews for the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy (BJPT). Mancini MC; Cardoso JR; Sampaio RF; Costa LC; Cabral CM; Costa LO Braz J Phys Ther; 2014; 18(6):471-80. PubMed ID: 25590440 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Does knowledge brokering improve the quality of rapid review proposals? A before and after study. Moore G; Redman S; D'Este C; Makkar S; Turner T Syst Rev; 2017 Jan; 6(1):23. PubMed ID: 28129795 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Including non-public data and studies in systematic reviews and systematic maps. Haddaway NR; Collins AM; Coughlin D; Kohl C Environ Int; 2017 Feb; 99():351-355. PubMed ID: 27939046 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Mastering verb tenses in literature reviews. Johnson SH Nurse Author Ed; 2004; 14(1):7-9. PubMed ID: 14735767 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Systematic reviews in midwifery. van Teijlingen E; Napper M; Bruce J; Ireland J RCM Midwives; 2006 May; 9(5):186-8. PubMed ID: 16734008 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. How to read and understand and use systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Leucht S; Kissling W; Davis JM Acta Psychiatr Scand; 2009 Jun; 119(6):443-50. PubMed ID: 19469725 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The systematic reviews need to be recognized. Farooq S J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2005 Jul; 15(7):449-50. PubMed ID: 16197883 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Manual search approaches used by systematic reviewers in dermatology. Vassar M; Atakpo P; Kash MJ J Med Libr Assoc; 2016 Oct; 104(4):302-304. PubMed ID: 27822152 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A comparison of the quality of Cochrane reviews and systematic reviews published in paper-based journals. Shea B; Moher D; Graham I; Pham B; Tugwell P Eval Health Prof; 2002 Mar; 25(1):116-29. PubMed ID: 11868441 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]