Poor methodological quality and reporting standards of systematic reviews in burn care management-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Poor methodological quality and reporting standards of systematic reviews in burn care management

Published:2016-12-18 Issue:5 Volume:14 Page:754-763
ISSN:1742-4801
Container-title:International Wound Journal
language:en
Short-container-title:Int Wound J

Author:

Wasiak Jason¹²,Tyack Zephanie³,Ware Robert⁴,Goodwin Nicholas⁵,Faggion Clovis M⁶

Affiliation:

1. Epworth HealthCare; Richmond VA Australia

2. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine; Monash University; Melbourne VIC Australia

3. Centre for Children's Burns and Trauma Research, Children's Health Research Centre; The University of Queensland & Centre for Functioning and Health Research Metro South Health; Brisbane QLD Australia

4. Menzies Health Institute Queensland; Griffith University; Brisbane QLD Australia

5. Department of Operations; Ambulance Victoria; Melbourne VIC Australia

6. Department of Periodontology and Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry; University of Munster; Munster Germany

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Dermatology,Surgery

Link

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/doi/10.1111/iwj.12692/fullpdf

Reference144 articles.

1. Evaluation of the endorsement of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement on the quality of published systematic review and meta-analyses;Panic;PLoS One,2013

2. Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in the orthopaedic literature;Gagnier;J Bone Joint Surg Am,2013

3. Reporting and methodological qualities of published surgical meta-analyses;Zhang;J Clin Epidemiol,2016

4. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration;Liberati;PLoS Med,2009

5. Systematic reviews published in higher impact clinical journals were of higher quality;Fleming;J Clin Epidemiol,2014

Cited by 31 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. Characteristics and completeness of reporting of systematic reviews of prevalence studies in adult populations: a metaresearch study;Journal of Clinical Epidemiology;2024-10

2. Quality of systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in dermatology;Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods;2024-05

3. Evaluation of methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews on conservative non-pharmacological musculoskeletal pain management in children and adolescents: A methodological analysis;Musculoskeletal Science and Practice;2024-02

4. Characteristics and completeness of reporting of systematic reviews of prevalence studies in adult populations: a meta-research study.;2024-02-01

5. Health systems research in burn care: an evidence gap map;Injury Prevention;2023-08-02