-
1
-
-
0002100348
-
Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research
-
G.V. Glass Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research Educ Res 5 1976 3 8
-
(1976)
Educ Res
, vol.5
, pp. 3-8
-
-
Glass, G.V.1
-
3
-
-
68049122102
-
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
-
D. Moher, A. Liberati, J. Tetzlaff, and D.G. Altman Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement PLoS Med 6 2009 e1000097
-
(2009)
PLoS Med
, vol.6
, pp. e1000097
-
-
Moher, D.1
Liberati, A.2
Tetzlaff, J.3
Altman, D.G.4
-
4
-
-
0034685429
-
Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group
-
D.F. Stroup, J.A. Berlin, S.C. Morton, I. Olkin, G.D. Williamson, and D. Rennie Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group J Am Med Assoc 283 2000 2008 2012
-
(2000)
J Am Med Assoc
, vol.283
, pp. 2008-2012
-
-
Stroup, D.F.1
Berlin, J.A.2
Morton, S.C.3
Olkin, I.4
Williamson, G.D.5
Rennie, D.6
-
5
-
-
84921434009
-
-
Accessed April 30
-
PROSPERO webpage. Available from: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/NIHR-PROSPERO/. Accessed April 30, 2014.
-
(2014)
PROSPERO Webpage
-
-
-
6
-
-
84876180623
-
The importance of PROSPERO to the National Institute for Health Research
-
S. Davies The importance of PROSPERO to the National Institute for Health Research Systematic Rev 1 2012 5
-
(2012)
Systematic Rev
, vol.1
, pp. 5
-
-
Davies, S.1
-
7
-
-
34347381922
-
Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions
-
C. Schardt, M.B. Adams, T. Owens, S. Keitz, and P. Fontelo Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 7 2007 16
-
(2007)
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
, vol.7
, pp. 16
-
-
Schardt, C.1
Adams, M.B.2
Owens, T.3
Keitz, S.4
Fontelo, P.5
-
8
-
-
0141870148
-
Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies
-
J.J. Deeks, J. Dinnes, R. D'Amico, A.J. Sowden, C. Sakarovitch, and F. Song Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies Health Technol Assess 7 2003 27
-
(2003)
Health Technol Assess
, vol.7
, pp. 27
-
-
Deeks, J.J.1
Dinnes, J.2
D'Amico, R.3
Sowden, A.J.4
Sakarovitch, C.5
Song, F.6
-
9
-
-
0029914622
-
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?
-
A.R. Jadad, R.A. Moore, and D. Carroll Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17 1996 1 12
-
(1996)
Control Clin Trials
, vol.17
, pp. 1-12
-
-
Jadad, A.R.1
Moore, R.A.2
Carroll, D.3
-
10
-
-
84905862289
-
Preoperative risk factors for anastomotic leakage after resection for colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
-
H.C. Pommergaard, B. Gessler, J. Burcharth, E. Angenete, E. Haglind, and J. Rosenberg Preoperative risk factors for anastomotic leakage after resection for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis Colorectal Dis 16 2014 662 671
-
(2014)
Colorectal Dis
, vol.16
, pp. 662-671
-
-
Pommergaard, H.C.1
Gessler, B.2
Burcharth, J.3
Angenete, E.4
Haglind, E.5
Rosenberg, J.6
|