Bibliography
Filters: Keyword is Meta-Analysis as Topic [Clear All Filters]
Use of methodological search filters to identify diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to the omission of relevant studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(3):234-40. Abstract
Use of methodological search filters to identify diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to the omission of relevant studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(3):234-40. Abstract
Unpublished data can be of value in systematic reviews of adverse effects: methodological overview. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(10):1071-81. Abstract
Systematic reviews of adverse effects: framework for a structured approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:32. Abstract
Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(1):45-53. Abstract
Surveillance search techniques identified the need to update systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(8):755-62. Abstract
Strength of recommendation taxonomy (SORT): a patient-centered approach to grading evidence in the medical literature. Am Fam Physician. 2004;69(3):548-56. Abstract
Should unpublished data be included in meta-analyses? Current convictions and controversies. JAMA. 1993;269(21):2749-53. Abstract
Search strategies to identify information on adverse effects: a systematic review. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009;97(2):84-92. Abstract
Search strategies in systematic reviews in periodontology and implant dentistry. J Clin Periodontol. 2013;40(9):883-8. Abstract
Reporting standards for literature searches and report inclusion criteria: making research syntheses more transparent and easy to replicate. Res Synth Methods. 2015;6(1):87-95. Abstract
RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11:21. Abstract
RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11:21. Abstract
RAMESES publication standards: meta-narrative reviews. BMC Med. 2013;11:20. Abstract
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):264-9, W64.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.
Poor reporting and inadequate searches were apparent in systematic reviews of adverse effects. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(5):440-8. Abstract
PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: a comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:579. Abstract
Novel citation-based search method for scientific literature: application to meta-analyses. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015;15:84. Abstract
No consensus exists on search reporting methods for systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(8):748-54. Abstract
Methods for documenting systematic review searches: a discussion of common issues. Res Synth Methods. 2014;5(2):98-115. Abstract
Meta-epidemiologic analysis indicates that MEDLINE searches are sufficient for diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(11):1192-9. Abstract
Identifying systematic reviews of the adverse effects of health care interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6(22). Abstract