Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews Published in the Urological Literature from 1998 to 2012

Journal of Urology

Volumn 194, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 1374-1379

  Corbyons, Katherine ^a   Han, Julia ^b   Neuberger, Molly M ^c   Dahm, Philipp ^c,d  

^a CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^c Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

evidence based medicine; publishing; quality improvement; review literature as topic; urology

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CHI SQUARE TEST; ENDOUROLOGY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HUMAN; MEDICAL EDUCATION; METHODOLOGY; MICTURITION DISORDER; ONCOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; STUDENT T TEST; UROLOGY; PUBLICATION; STANDARDS; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; UROLOGY;

EID: 84943665020     PISSN: 00225347     EISSN: 15273792     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.05.085     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. S.L. MacDonald, S.E. Canfield, S.F. Fesperman, and et al. Assessment of the methodological quality of systematic reviews published in the urological literature from 1998 to 2008 J Urol 184 2010 648
2. B.J. Shea, L.M. Bouter, J. Peterson, and et al. External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) PLoS One 2 2007 e1350
3. B.J. Shea, J.M. Grimshaw, G.A. Wells, and et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews BMC Med Res Methodol 7 2007 10
4. B.J. Shea, C. Hamel, G.A. Wells, and et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews J Clin Epidemiol 62 2009 1013
5. M.O. Sharif, F.N. Janjua-Sharif, H. Ali, and et al. Systematic reviews explained: AMSTAR - how to tell the good from the bad and the ugly Oral Health Dent Manag 12 2013 9
6. T. McGinn, P.C. Wyer, T.B. Newman, and et al. Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 3. Measures of observer variability (kappa statistic) CMAJ 171 2004 1369
7. S. Adie, D. Ma, I.A. Harris, and et al. Quality of conduct and reporting of meta-analyses of surgical interventions Ann Surg 261 2015 685
8. P.S. Fleming, D. Koletsi, J. Seehra, and et al. Systematic reviews published in higher impact clinical journals were of higher quality J Clin Epidemiol 67 2014 754
9. C.B. van der Pol, M.D. McInnes, W. Petrcich, and et al. Is quality and completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in high impact radiology journals associated with citation rates? PLoS One 10 2015 e0119892
10. G.H. Guyatt, A.D. Oxman, V. Montori, and et al. GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence - publication bias J Clin Epidemiol 64 2011 1277
11. T.Y. Tseng, T.L. Stoffs, and P. Dahm Evidence-based urology in practice: publication bias BJU Int 106 2010 318
12. M. Faraday, H. Hubbard, B. Kosiak, and et al. Staying at the cutting edge: a review and analysis of evidence reporting and grading; the recommendations of the American Urological Association BJU Int 104 2009 294
13. J.S. Wolf Jr., H. Hubbard, M.M. Faraday, and et al. Clinical practice guidelines to inform evidence-based clinical practice World J Urol 29 2011 303
14. P. Dahm, C.R. Chapple, B.R. Konety, and et al. The future of clinical practice guidelines in urology Eur Urol 60 2011 72
15. K. Dickersin To reform U.S. health care, start with systematic reviews Science 329 2010 516
16. M. Imamura, J. Cook, S. MacLennan, and et al. Evidence-based urology in practice: heterogeneity in a systematic review meta-analysis BJU Int 105 2010 770
17. T.Y. Tseng, P. Dahm, R.W. Poolman, and et al. Users' guide to the urological literature: how to use a systematic literature review and meta-analysis J Urol 180 2008 1249
18. S.E. Canfield, and P. Dahm Introduction to a new series: advanced topics in evidence-based urologic oncology Urol Oncol 29 2011 446