201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34240051)
1. Evaluating the Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses About Breast Augmentation Using AMSTAR.
Yuan M; Wu J; Austin RE; Lista F; Ahmad J
Aesthet Surg J Open Forum; 2021 Sep; 3(3):ojab020. PubMed ID: 34240051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR).
Yuan M; Wu J; Austin RE; Hofer SOP; Lista F; Ahmad J
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open; 2021 Nov; 9(11):e3897. PubMed ID: 34815919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Completeness of reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses in vascular surgery.
Javidan A; Alaichi J; Nassar Y; Li A; Balta KY; Naji F
J Vasc Surg; 2023 Dec; 78(6):1550-1558.e2. PubMed ID: 37068527
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Methodological assessment and overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews with meta-analyses focusing on traumatic dental injuries: A cross-sectional study.
Nagendrababu V; Faggion CM; Gopinath VK; Narasimhan S; Duncan HF; Levin L; Abbott PV; Dummer PMH
Dent Traumatol; 2023 Dec; 39(6):637-646. PubMed ID: 37594908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluating the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published on direct oral anticoagulants in the past 5 years.
Eshaghpour A; Li A; Javidan AP; Chen N; Yang S; Crowther MA
BMJ Evid Based Med; 2020 Jun; ():. PubMed ID: 32493834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Systematic Reviews in Sports Medicine.
DiSilvestro KJ; Tjoumakaris FP; Maltenfort MG; Spindler KP; Freedman KB
Am J Sports Med; 2016 Feb; 44(2):533-8. PubMed ID: 25899433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A Critical Analysis of Reporting in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in the Peyronie's Disease Literature.
Bole R; Gottlich HC; Ziegelmann MJ; Corrigan D; Levine LA; Mulhall JP; Bajic P
J Sex Med; 2022 Apr; 19(4):629-640. PubMed ID: 35177375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Systematic review adherence to methodological or reporting quality.
Pussegoda K; Turner L; Garritty C; Mayhew A; Skidmore B; Stevens A; Boutron I; Sarkis-Onofre R; Bjerre LM; Hróbjartsson A; Altman DG; Moher D
Syst Rev; 2017 Jul; 6(1):131. PubMed ID: 28720117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Poor methodological quality and reporting standards of systematic reviews in burn care management.
Wasiak J; Tyack Z; Ware R; Goodwin N; Faggion CM
Int Wound J; 2017 Oct; 14(5):754-763. PubMed ID: 27990772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Use of AMSTAR-2 in the methodological assessment of systematic reviews: protocol for a methodological study.
Lu C; Lu T; Ge L; Yang N; Yan P; Yang K
Ann Transl Med; 2020 May; 8(10):652. PubMed ID: 32566589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Association of study quality with completeness of reporting: have completeness of reporting and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in major radiology journals changed since publication of the PRISMA statement?
Tunis AS; McInnes MD; Hanna R; Esmail K
Radiology; 2013 Nov; 269(2):413-26. PubMed ID: 23824992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. The Reporting and Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews Underpinning Clinical Practice Guidelines Focused on the Management of Cutaneous Melanoma: Cross-Sectional Analysis.
Khalid M; Sutterfield B; Minley K; Ottwell R; Abercrombie M; Heath C; Torgerson T; Hartwell M; Vassar M
JMIR Dermatol; 2023 Dec; 6():e43821. PubMed ID: 38060306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Most systematic reviews reporting adherence to AMSTAR 2 had critically low methodological quality: a cross-sectional meta-research study.
Bojcic R; Todoric M; Puljak L
J Clin Epidemiol; 2024 Jan; 165():111210. PubMed ID: 37931822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reporting and Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Nursing Interventions in Patients With Alzheimer's Disease: General Implications of the Findings.
Sun X; Zhou X; Zhang Y; Liu H
J Nurs Scholarsh; 2019 May; 51(3):308-316. PubMed ID: 30806019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Quality of reporting among systematic reviews underpinning the ESC/ACC guidelines on ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death.
Garrett EP; Hightower B; Walters C; Srouji D; Chronister J; Torgerson T; Hartwell M; McIntire R; Love M; Vassar M
BMJ Evid Based Med; 2022 Dec; 27(6):352-360. PubMed ID: 35277437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. PRISMA and AMSTAR show systematic reviews on health literacy and cancer screening are of good quality.
Sharma S; Oremus M
J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Jul; 99():123-131. PubMed ID: 29654821
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A systematic review of the quality of conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric surgery.
Cullis PS; Gudlaugsdottir K; Andrews J
PLoS One; 2017; 12(4):e0175213. PubMed ID: 28384296
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
