No consensus exists on search reporting methods for systematic reviews-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

No consensus exists on search reporting methods for systematic reviews

Published:2008-08 Issue:8 Volume:61 Page:748-754
ISSN:0895-4356
Container-title:Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
language:en
Short-container-title:Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Author:

Sampson Margaret,McGowan Jessie,Tetzlaff Jennifer,Cogo Elise,Moher David

Publisher

Elsevier BV

Subject

Epidemiology

Reference22 articles.

1. Brazier H. Poorly executed and inadequately documented? An analysis of the literature searches on which systematic reviews are based. 2nd Symposium on Systematic Reviews: Beyond the Basic, 1999.

2. Room for improvement? A survey of the methods used in systematic reviews of adverse effects;Golder;BMC Med Res Methodol,2006

3. Reporting of the role of the expert searcher in Cochrane reviews;Sampson,2005

4. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM statement;Moher;Lancet,1999

5. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews;Moher;PLoS Med,2007

Cited by 54 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Enhancing literature search transparency and quality in systematic reviews;Central European Journal of Nursing and Midwifery;2024-06-05

2. Systematic review search strategies are poorly reported and not reproducible: a cross-sectional metaresearch study;Journal of Clinical Epidemiology;2024-02

3. An Introduction to Reporting for Searching Evidence in Systematic Review;Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences;2023-08-01

4. Systematic review search strategies are poorly described and not reproducible: a cross-sectional meta-research study;2023-05-16

5. Natural Language Processing Applications in the Clinical Neurosciences: A Machine Learning Augmented Systematic Review;Acta Neurochirurgica Supplement;2021-12-04