High prevalence but low impact of data extraction and reporting errors were found in Cochrane systematic reviews.
about
The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaborationOn the reproducibility of meta-analyses: six practical recommendations.The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaborationData extraction from machine-translated versus original language randomized trial reports: a comparative study.A case study of binary outcome data extraction across three systematic reviews of hip arthroplasty: errors and differences of selectionEvaluating Data Abstraction Assistant, a novel software application for data abstraction during systematic reviews: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Ethical, social, and cultural issues related to clinical genetic testing and counseling in low- and middle-income countries: protocol for a systematic reviewWhat comparative effectiveness research is needed? A framework for using guidelines and systematic reviews to identify evidence gaps and research priorities.Meta-analysis and The Cochrane Collaboration: 20 years of the Cochrane Statistical Methods GroupDescribe the outcomes of dysvascular partial foot amputation and how these compare to transtibial amputation: a systematic review protocol for the development of shared decision-making resources.Extractive text summarization system to aid data extraction from full text in systematic review development.Gendered dimensions of obesity in childhood and adolescence.PDF text classification to leverage information extraction from publication reportsDesigning a rapid response program to support evidence-informed decision-making in the Americas region: using the best available evidence and case studies.Disagreements in meta-analyses using outcomes measured on continuous or rating scales: observer agreement study.Errors in the conduct of systematic reviews of pharmacological interventions for irritable bowel syndrome.Quality and transparency of overviews of systematic reviews.Rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair: a systematic review.Quality of meta-analyses in major leading gastroenterology and hepatology journals: A systematic review.Increasing value and reducing waste in data extraction for systematic reviews: tracking data in data extraction forms.Frequency of data extraction errors and methods to increase data extraction quality: a methodological review.Response to 'Increasing value and reducing waste in data extraction for systematic reviews: tracking data in data extraction forms'.
P2860
Q21092360-0D0067B1-3A0F-4EDF-84BB-83FEB0A1EDD9Q24658642-A251D7E7-4115-409F-BB53-B9B9F60A4326Q27860581-54170B67-442D-4C58-BE75-31272696AA09Q30690257-815E5F31-3B1C-4F72-8E60-D784522F85CDQ30717163-3997C75A-CB9C-4BF8-8D52-FC6BFED89E56Q30829526-12479352-9EFF-4063-BCAE-AA81F8EAFC2AQ33893243-2E721396-9EB0-4B5F-85D3-0D55B6261765Q34258967-59D54C17-6302-4780-A723-1503AD39FAF0Q34447636-12795B8B-7178-4F74-8DBA-A40BE2444616Q35861408-8AA05367-61A8-4BE7-B263-D68942851B1BQ36227523-0440BE7C-93A3-4BDC-B0F7-C57E00DF3DAEQ36492434-D7410843-E9F4-434F-BC48-746FEB008E0DQ36971227-D4B895C0-5551-4C96-A292-735AB4E2E210Q37188802-186115E7-6C05-48EB-8B1D-A759194DE35CQ37579463-8C62D3A6-44FB-4C3E-AF1B-BEAE4F8B6802Q37634300-19D3F992-4762-401D-901F-3806200C87AFQ38106726-27900A31-FCF3-4321-B96D-99A416D1DEA7Q38943377-055E932A-5D95-4600-9FBA-470F589DF016Q38947612-335F37F2-DD8C-41FF-AA2C-2CEC9D4956A1Q42342700-F29B8BC4-F5A5-42B8-93EE-9968DBC09A2BQ47105003-F18F1AF7-403E-488A-8684-B9205D9215E8Q48168831-409CCB26-50A3-44A7-9253-F201056714DC
P2860
High prevalence but low impact of data extraction and reporting errors were found in Cochrane systematic reviews.
description
2005 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
2005 թուականի Ապրիլին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած
@hyw
2005 թվականի ապրիլին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված
@hy
2005年の論文
@ja
2005年学术文章
@wuu
2005年学术文章
@zh-cn
2005年学术文章
@zh-hans
2005年学术文章
@zh-my
2005年学术文章
@zh-sg
2005年學術文章
@yue
name
High prevalence but low impact ...... n Cochrane systematic reviews.
@ast
High prevalence but low impact ...... n Cochrane systematic reviews.
@en
type
label
High prevalence but low impact ...... n Cochrane systematic reviews.
@ast
High prevalence but low impact ...... n Cochrane systematic reviews.
@en
prefLabel
High prevalence but low impact ...... n Cochrane systematic reviews.
@ast
High prevalence but low impact ...... n Cochrane systematic reviews.
@en
P50
P1476
High prevalence but low impact ...... n Cochrane systematic reviews.
@en
P2093
Ashley P Jones
Rosalind L Smyth
P304
P356
10.1016/J.JCLINEPI.2004.11.024
P577
2005-04-18T00:00:00Z