The medical review article revisited: has the science improved?
about
Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviewsSystematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of location and citation countsWhat happened to the valid POEMs? A survey of review articles on the treatment of type 2 diabetes.Reporting bias and other biases affecting systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a methodological commentary.An increased body mass index is no risk factor for postoperative nausea and vomiting. A systematic review and results of original data.Evidence-based librarianship: an overview.Low molecular weight heparin-induced skin necrosis-a systematic review.Identifying approaches for assessing methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews: a descriptive study.Testosterone supplementation therapy for older men: potential benefits and risks.Developing evidence-based dentistry skills: how to interpret randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews.Commentary: toward systematic reviews in epidemiology.Mental health disorders among individuals with mental retardation: challenges to accurate prevalence estimates.A methodological systematic review of what's wrong with meta-ethnography reporting.The role of nutrients in the prevention and treatment of Alzheimer's disease: methodology for a systematic review."Brimful of STARLITE": toward standards for reporting literature searchesShould systematic reviews include searches for published errata?How to write a review article?Assessment of methodological quality of primary studies by systematic reviews: results of the metaquality cross sectional studyUnderstanding systematic reviews and meta-analysisSinus floor elevation using osteotomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Disclosures of conflicts of interest in psychiatric review articles.Little evidence to support the use of editorial peer review to ensure quality of published research.Writing a narrative biomedical review: considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors.Introduction to systematic reviews in animal agriculture and veterinary medicine.JPEN Journal Club 5. Review articles.Understanding Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses [Formula: see text].Expert synthesis of the literature to support critical care decision making.A call for systematic reviews.Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review.Improving the peer review of narrative literature reviews.Practical guides to efficient life-long learning.Synthesizing qualitative research: a review of published reports
P2860
Q21144675-34AC4F4D-8819-4236-9EDC-056BD9069DCBQ24798931-5626282E-3752-487B-8F67-2BFF05DF39D7Q30452941-C31EDC08-BBAA-43F0-B55D-0739EFF42414Q30484545-DE58A55B-E615-4CD4-A482-21A3547498F8Q30626874-3DA2E6E5-EE65-4161-821A-C594989E04F4Q30952301-6717AC95-CC85-4136-B20E-090A80B4D129Q33363909-011944B3-958E-4DBB-842E-9B7D85CFDAD9Q33814405-38F0814B-B8F1-4988-8CD5-848E1B49303BQ34171397-1A118E02-B073-4AA1-9B78-80E72FB9DF00Q34423182-1EA6F411-E016-4C5E-B266-D9D33EF089A4Q34426283-18CFF6F2-6E6B-49FC-AFBC-7604F58B3E48Q34756771-F8AF5CB5-4F71-415D-BD2C-AC4F3D281A98Q34778517-C405C87A-77E6-4E83-AC51-E20D5883A769Q34999144-F7EC7646-1A05-43C8-AE31-FF0DFE57FE11Q35120003-5A3CB38E-DE6D-4464-AF34-DCB88C53D49BQ35691950-C345E27E-9D4B-46AB-B284-612B28582BAFQ35993822-4C4443EF-D5C7-4A12-A36B-D123E8E5B9A1Q36092201-789A3C52-EE47-484D-8A2D-F64CEB8036AEQ36205702-68825531-2D60-4513-AC5D-CD4F2EB63DC6Q36229941-1819D5C7-8016-4397-A6E8-8C96DCB06FD0Q36579838-D6693CFA-05FE-4512-9A15-6732CF886EBFQ36949748-6EA2EF4D-E423-43BF-AC99-5F70508BFD80Q37907924-5756DC40-9236-4335-898F-98988C35D7FCQ38218261-C178FC6A-2D7F-491F-BC7B-E70DA1B801DBQ38222098-20223D65-8F95-40C5-B759-8752147A68A9Q38834454-B20C043D-0D77-47A0-B0F7-1542E306325FQ38961737-2DF7C81B-F972-489B-93EC-355899A243BCQ42357092-B4691AA6-E4F7-405D-B368-4920C8452560Q47159405-BCC6D2AC-4A69-44D9-9EE8-6BE00BFD907CQ49932679-69C63F12-9C40-4E20-9CB8-BB8375F0BD8CQ52005753-5969D433-6BF6-44A4-99EA-0DACE68AC5B5Q57536480-0DBE2C19-E0F1-4DF8-AD80-CFCFD143C4FA
P2860
The medical review article revisited: has the science improved?
description
1999 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
1999 թուականի Դեկտեմբերին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած
@hyw
1999 թվականի դեկտեմբերին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված
@hy
1999年の論文
@ja
1999年論文
@yue
1999年論文
@zh-hant
1999年論文
@zh-hk
1999年論文
@zh-mo
1999年論文
@zh-tw
1999年论文
@wuu
name
The medical review article revisited: has the science improved?
@ast
The medical review article revisited: has the science improved?
@en
type
label
The medical review article revisited: has the science improved?
@ast
The medical review article revisited: has the science improved?
@en
prefLabel
The medical review article revisited: has the science improved?
@ast
The medical review article revisited: has the science improved?
@en
P2093
P1476
The medical review article revisited: has the science improved?
@en
P2093
McAlister FA
van Walraven C
P304
P356
10.7326/0003-4819-131-12-199912210-00007
P407
P50
P577
1999-12-01T00:00:00Z