Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation

L Shamseer, D Moher, M Clarke, D Ghersi, A Liberati… - Bmj, 2015 - bmj.com
Protocols of systematic reviews and meta-analyses allow for planning and documentation of
review methods, act as a guard against arbitrary decision making during review conduct …

CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

D Moher, S Hopewell, KF Schulz, V Montori… - Bmj, 2010 - bmj.com
Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials
(RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and …

SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials

AW Chan, JM Tetzlaff, PC Gøtzsche, DG Altman… - Bmj, 2013 - bmj.com
High quality protocols facilitate proper conduct, reporting, and external review of clinical
trials. However, the completeness of trial protocols is often inadequate. To help improve the …

[HTML][HTML] Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

D Moher, A Liberati, J Tetzlaff, DG Altman… - International journal of …, 2010 - Elsevier
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become increasingly important in health care.
Clinicians read them to keep up to date with their field, 1, 2 and they are often used as a …

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

D Moher, A Liberati, J Tetzlaff, DG Altman… - Annals of internal …, 2009 - acpjournals.org
Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic
Reviews and Meta-Analyses), an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic …

The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration

A Liberati, DG Altman, J Tetzlaff, C Mulrow… - Annals of internal …, 2009 - acpjournals.org
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarize evidence relating to
efficacy and safety of health care interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and …

GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias)

GH Guyatt, AD Oxman, G Vist, R Kunz, J Brozek… - Journal of clinical …, 2011 - Elsevier
In the GRADE approach, randomized trials start as high-quality evidence and observational
studies as low-quality evidence, but both can be rated down if most of the relevant evidence …

Considering bias and conflicts of interest among the included studies

I Boutron, MJ Page, JPT Higgins… - … systematic reviews of …, 2019 - Wiley Online Library
Bias can arise because of the actions of primary study investigators or because of the
actions of review authors, or may be unavoidable due to constraints on how research can be …

[HTML][HTML] Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy

EH Turner, AM Matthews, E Linardatos… - … England Journal of …, 2008 - Mass Medical Soc
Background Evidence-based medicine is valuable to the extent that the evidence base is
complete and unbiased. Selective publication of clinical trials—and the outcomes within …

Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study

L Wood, M Egger, LL Gluud, KF Schulz, P Jüni… - bmj, 2008 - bmj.com
Objective To examine whether the association of inadequate or unclear allocation
concealment and lack of blinding with biased estimates of intervention effects varies with the …