Quality of randomized trials in solid organ transplantation

Transplantation

Volumn 80, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 431-

  Morris, Peter J ^a  

^a ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EDITORIAL; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE TREATMENT; JADAD SCALE; MEDICAL LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS; ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCORING SYSTEM; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

HUMANS; ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS;

EID: 23944487673     PISSN: 00411337     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.tp.0000179785.83027.91     Document Type: Editorial

References (6)

1. Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. In: Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman DC, eds. Systematic Reviews in health care: meta-analysis in context, 2nd ed. London: BMJ Books, 2001.
2. Fritsche L, Einecke G, Fleina F, et al Reports of large immunosuppression trials in kidney transplantation: Room for improvement. Am J Transplant 2004; 4: 738.
3. Chan A-W, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. BMJ 2005; 330: 753.
4. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carrol D, et al Assessing the quality of reports of randomised clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17:1.
5. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D for the CONSORT Group. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomised trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134:663.
6. htpp://www.consort-statement.org/.