Recommendations for assessing the risk of bias in systematic reviews of health-care interventions

Clicks: 364
ID: 266809
2018
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #20 of 75 articles by views in journal of clinical epidemiology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Risk-of-bias assessment remains a challenging but essential step in systematic reviews. We presented standards to promote transparency of judgments.
Reference Key
m2018journalrecommendations Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Viswanathan M;Patnode CD;Berkman ND;Bass EB;Chang S;Hartling L;Murad MH;Treadwell JR;Kane RL;;
Journal journal of clinical epidemiology
Year 2018
DOI
DOI not found
URL
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29248724
Keywords
National Center for Biotechnology Information NCBI NLM MEDLINE humans pubmed abstract nih national institutes of health national library of medicine reproducibility of results research support non-u.s. gov't u.s. gov't P.H.S. risk assessment evidence-based medicine / standards guidelines as topic research design / standards* pmid:29248724 doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.12.004 meera viswanathan carrie d patnode robert l kane bias* systematic reviews as topic*

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.