Conclusiveness of the Cochrane Reviews in Nutrition: A systematic analysis

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Volumn 68, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 143-145

  Cohen, S ^a,b   Mandel, D ^a,b   Mimouni, F B ^a,b   Marom, R ^a,b   Lubetzky, R ^a,b  

^a TEL AVIV SOURASKY MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

^b TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; NUTRITION DISORDERS; NUTRITIONAL SCIENCES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84893742406     PISSN: 09543007     EISSN: 14765640     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ejcn.2013.252     Document Type: Review

References (5)

1. Mandel D, Littner Y, Mimouni FB, Lubetzky R. Conclusiveness of the Cochrane Neonatal Reviews: a systematic analysis. Acta Paediatr 2006; 95: 1209-1212.
2. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997; 315: 629-634.
3. Sterne JA, Gavaghan D, Egger M. Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. J Clin Epidemiol 2000; 53: 1119-1129.
4. Littner Y, Mimouni FB, Dollberg S, Mandel D. Negative results and impact factor: a lesson from neonatology. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2005; 159: 1036-1037.
5. Egger M, Zellweger-Zahner T, Schneider M, Junker C, Lengeler C, Antes G. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet 1997; 350: 326-329.