Exploring the fragility of meta-analyses in ophthalmology: a systematic review-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Exploring the fragility of meta-analyses in ophthalmology: a systematic review

Published:2024-07-20 Issue: Volume: Page:
ISSN:0950-222X
Container-title:Eye
language:en
Short-container-title:Eye

Author:

Nanji Keean,Xie Jim,Hatamnejad Amin^ORCID,Pur Daiana R.,Phillips Mark,Zeraatkar Dena,Wong Tien Yin^ORCID,Guymer Robyn H.,Kaiser Peter K.^ORCID,Sivaprasad Sobha,Bhandari Mohit,Steel David H.,Wykoff Charles C.^ORCID,Chaudhary Varun^ORCID

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Link

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41433-024-03255-2.pdf

Reference54 articles.

1. Burns PB, Rohrich RJ, Chung KC. The levels of evidence and their role in evidence-based medicine. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:305–10. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0B013E318219C171.

2. Shekelle PG, Woolf SH, Eccles M, Grimshaw J. Clinical guidelines: developing guidelines. BMJ Br Med J. 1999;318:593–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJ.318.7183.593.

3. Atal I, Porcher R, Boutron I, Ravaud P. The statistical significance of meta-analyses is frequently fragile: definition of a fragility index for meta-analyses. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019;111:32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLINEPI.2019.03.012.

4. Pocock SJ. Current issues in the design and interpretation of clinical trials. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1985;290:39–42. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJ.290.6461.39.

5. Sterne JAC, Smith GD, Cox DR. Sifting the evidence—what’s wrong with significance tests? BMJ Br Med J. 2001;322:226–31. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJ.322.7280.226.

Cited by 1 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. Meta-mistake: are fragile meta-analyses in ophthalmology worth the high cost?;Eye;2024-09-09