Abridged checklist for the evaluation of basic biomedical research papers;Lista de comprobación (checklist) abreviada para la evaluación de artículos de investigación biomédica básica

Medicina Clinica

Volumn 121, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 228-230

  Bosch, Fèlix ^a   Guardiola, Elena ^b   Reidenberg, Marcus M ^c   Reidenberg, June W ^c   Erill, Sergio ^c   Martín Fontelles, M Isabel ^c   Alfaro, Vicente ^c   Baños, Josep E ^c   Carne, Xavier ^c   Cobo, Erik ^c   Cullell Young, Martí ^c   Dominguez García, Angela ^c   Fresquet, Anna ^c   Rosales, Santiago ^c   Roset, Pere N ^c   Sagalés, Teresa ^c   Videla, Sebastián ^c   Rico Villademoros, Fernando ^c   Andrade, Raúl J ^c   Lucena, M Isabel ^c   Reverte, María ^c   Sallés, Joan ^c   more..

^a Fundacion Dr Antonio Esteve   (Spain)

^b Unidad de Information Docum Medica   (Spain)

^c NONE

Author keywords

Biomedical journals; Biomedical research; Checklist; Guidelines; Peer review; Quality assessment

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICINE; DATA ANALYSIS; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDICAL EXPERT; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL;

EID: 0043066539     PISSN: 00257753     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1157/13050000     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Pitkin RM. The care and feeding of reviewers. CBE Views 1997;20:191.
2. Bad peer reviewers [editorial]. Nature 2001;413:93.
3. Bacchetti P. Peer review of statistics in medical research: the other problem. BMJ 2002;324:1271-3.
4. Rennie D. Fourth International Congress of Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. JAMA 2002;287:2759-60.
5. Lionel NDW, Herxheimer A. Assessing reports of therapeutics trials. BMJ 1970;3:637-40.
6. Gardner MJ, Machin D, Campbell MJ. Use of check lists in assessing the statistical content of medical studies. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 1986;292:810-2.
7. Reidenberg MM. The quality of clinical research. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1990;47:669-70.
8. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001;134:663-94.
9. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. QUOROM Group. Br J Surg 2000;87:1448-54.
10. Mora-Ripoll R. Cómo mejorar la calidad estadística de los artículos presentados a revistas biomédicas: lista de comprobación para los autores. Med Clin (Barc) 1999;113:138-49.
11. Rangachari PK, Mierson S. A checklist to help students analyze published article in basic medical sciences. Am J Physiol 1995;268:S21-S5.
12. Seals DR, Tanaka H. Manuscript peer review: a helpful checklist for student and novice referees. Adv Physiol Educ 2000;22:52-8.
13. Rosales S. Revisión científica: ¿quién revisa a los revisores? Siete Días Médicos 2002;507:27-8.
14. Reidenberg JW. Improving peer review: a guide for reviewers of biomedical research. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2002;72:469-73.
15. Weintraub M. How to evaluate reports of clinical trials. Hosp Formul 1990;1463-75.
16. Morera-Montes J, Custodi-Canosa J. El proceso de selección de originales. MEDIFAM 2000;10:522-9.
17. Checklists. BMJ. Disponible en: http://bmj.com/advice/checklists.shtml [consultado el 12/12/02].
18. Proto AV. Radiology 2000: reviewing for radiology. Radiology 2000;215: 619-21.
19. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJM, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1-12.
20. Bobenrieth-Astete MA. Pautas para la evaluación de artículos originales. En: Burgos-Rodríguez R, editor. Metodología de investigación y escritura científica en clínica. Monografía de la EASP, n.o 15. 2.a ed. Granada: Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública, 1996; p. 463-88.
21. Cho MK, Bero LA, Instruments for assessing the quality of drug studies published in the medical literature. JAMA 1994;22:101-4.
22. Fowkes FGR, Fulton PM. Critical appraisal of published research: introductory guidelines. BMJ 1991;302:1136-40.
23. Sacristán JA, Soto J, Galende I. Evaluación crítica de ensayos clínicos. Med Clin (Barc) 1993;100:780-7.
24. The Asilomar Working Group on Recommendations for Reporting of Clinical Trials in Biomedical Literature. Checklist of information for inclusion in reports of clinical trials. Ann Intern Med 1996;124:741-3.