Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials.

Keywords

Internal validity, External validity, Systematic review, Quality (philosophy), Clinical trial

References

• Meta-analysis: statistical alchemy for the 21st century.信太郎 近藤 — 1995
• Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction : collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1000 patientsJohan Herlitz — 1994
• What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trialsS. Hollis, F. M. Campbell — 1999
• Handbook of research on teachingM. C. Wittrock — 1986
• A quality assessment of randomized control trials of primary treatment of breast cancer.A. Liberati, Harvey N. Himel, T. C. Chalmers — 1986
• The randomized clinical trial: bias in analysis.Graham S. May, David L. DeMets, Lilach M. Friedman — 1981
• Methodologic guidelines for systematic reviews of randomized control trials in health care from the Potsdam Consultation on Meta-Analysis.D.J. Cook, David L. Sackett, Walter O. Spitzer — 1995
• Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings.Donald T. Campbell — 1957
• Randomised trials, human nature, and reporting guidelines.Kenneth F. Schulz — 1996
• Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis.Allan S. Detsky, C. David Naylor, Keith O’Rourke — 1992
• Controversy in counting and attributing events in clinical trials.David L. Sackett, Michael Gent — 1979
• Communication behaviours in a hospital setting: an observational studyEnrico Coiera, V. Tombs — 1998
• Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials.Klaus‐Peter Schulz — 1995
• Treatment allocation in controlled trials: why randomise?Douglas G. Altman, John M. Bland — 1999
• Guilty until proved innocent.Harvey Lincoff — 1967
• Controversies in meta-analysis: the case of the trials of serum cholesterol reductionSG Thompson — 1993
• Antihypertensive drugs in very old people: a subgroup meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. INDANA Group.François Gueyffier, Christopher J. Bulpitt, Jean‐Pierre Boissel — 1999
• Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists.David Moher, Alejandro R. Jadad, Graham Nichol — 1995
• Physician interpretations and textbook definitions of blinding terminology in randomized controlled trials.P.J. Devereaux — 2001
• Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation.David Moher, Alison Jones, Leah Lepage — 2001

Cited by

• Evidence of pre-procedural statin therapy a meta-analysis of randomized trials.David E. Winchester, Xuerong Wen, Lola Xie — 2010
• Validating scales and indexesJohn M. Bland — 2002
• Subcutaneous infusion: non-metal cannulae vs metal butterfly needles.Anton Frise, Sergey V. Dvinskikh, Takahiro Ichikawa — 2002
• Cuidados paliativos no AVC em fase agudaMaria Duarte — 2011
• Evidence based evaluation of immuno-coagulatory interventions in critical care.Arash Afshari — 2011
• Randomization in controlled clinical trials: why the flip of a coin is so important.Bruno Bouteille — 2004
• Fecal Incontinence: The Quality of Reported Randomized, Controlled Trials in the Last Ten YearsM. Abada-Simon, A. Lecacheux, M. G. Aubier — 2008
• Does pain in individuals with multiple sclerosis affect employment? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Shahnaz Shahrbanian, Mohammad Auais, Pierre Duquette — 2013
• CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials光一郎 道本, 智幸 鈴木 — 2010
• Is the Benefit of Granulocyte Monocyte Adsorptive Apheresis in Ulcerative Colitis Overstated?Claude Herveou, Laurent Messean — 2010
• Surviving a site audit: tips for good clinical practice in an implant trial.María Elvira Ocete Rubio, Antonio Domínguez Jiménez, Eusebio Cano Carmona — 2009
• A meta-analysis of the relationship between lymphatic microvessel density and clinicopathological parameters in breast cancer.清司 田島, 宏 柿川, 凱夫 小園 — 2013
• Propensity scores: a practical method for assessing treatment effects in pain and symptom management research.Eric Israel Antillon, Matthew R. Morris, William Gregor — 2014
• Nutrition and age-related macular degeneration: research evidence in practice.一博 今井 — 2014
• Developing evidence-based dentistry skills: how to interpret randomized clinical trials and systematic reviewsBob E. Paladino — 2014
• Evidence-based decision-making 2: Systematic reviews and meta-analysis.Aminu K. Bello, Natasha Wiebe, Amit X. Garg — 2015
• Third molar consent forms: how comprehensive should they be?Danielle Britton, Andrew Burns, Stephen Hudyba — 2016
• Percutaneous angioplasty versus atherectomy for treatment of symptomatic infra-popliteal arterial disease.Obai Abdullah, Jad Omran, Tariq Enezate — 2017
• Bone marrow-derived stem cells as an adjunctive treatment for acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Raden Ayu Tuty Kuswardhani, Andreas Soejitno — 2011
• Healing of grafts of BioOss® and MoaBone® in a sheep maxillary sinus modelMichael M. Smith — 2011

Related papers

• The Quality of Accounting Research and Internal, External, and Construct ValidityErrol R. Iselin — 1999
• The New Understanding of Validity ConceptYinghua Ye — 2007
• Internal, External, and Ecological Validity in Research Design, Conduct, and EvaluationChittaranjan Andrade — 2018
• Are Improvements in Assessment Center Construct-Related Validity Paralleled by Improvements in Criterion-Related Validity?Andreja Wirz, Klaus G. Melchers, Stefan Schultheiß — 2014
• Concern Over Internal, External, and Incidence Validity in Studies of Child‐Care Quantity and Externalizing Behavior ProblemsEric Dearing, Henrik Daae Zachrisson — 2017
• The internal validity obsessionGregory Mitchell, Philip E. Tetlock — 2022