Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better?
Lin-Lu Ma, Yun-Yun Wang, Zhi-Hua Yang et al. · Military Medical Research · 2020 · Review
Full textCC BY
Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty
Filters3 filters applied
Year
Readable here
Study type
7 papersQuestions on this topic
Guidelines for clinical trial protocols for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the SPIRIT-AI extension
Samantha Cruz Rivera, Xiaoxuan Liu, An-Wen Chan et al. · Nature Medicine · 2020 · Review
Full textCC BY
Qualitative evidence synthesis for complex interventions and guideline development: clarification of the purpose, designs and relevant methods
Kate Flemming, Andrew Booth, Ruth Garside et al. · BMJ Global Health · 2019 · Review
Full textCC BY
Registration of systematic reviews in PROSPERO: 30,000 records and counting
Matthew J. Page, Larissa Shamseer, Andrea C. Tricco · Systematic Reviews · 2018 · Review
Full textCC BY
Degrees of Freedom in Planning, Running, Analyzing, and Reporting Psychological Studies: A Checklist to Avoid p-Hacking
Jelte M. Wicherts, Coosje L. S. Veldkamp, Hilde E. M. Augusteijn et al. · Frontiers in Psychology · 2016 · Review
Full textCC BY
Investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews: a methodologic review of guidance in the literature
Joel J Gagnier, David Moher, Heather Boon et al. · BMC Medical Research Methodology · 2012 · Review
Full textCC BY
Reporting bias in medical research - a narrative review
Natalie McGauran, Beate Wieseler, Julia Kreis et al. · Trials · 2010 · Review
Full textCC BY