A descriptive analysis of non-Cochrane child-relevant systematic reviews published in 2014

被引：0
|
作者：
Michelle Gates
Sarah A Elliott
Cydney Johnson
Denise Thomson
Katrina Williams
Ricardo M Fernandes
Lisa Hartling
机构：
[1] University of Alberta,Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence, Department of Pediatrics
[2] University of Alberta,Cochrane Child Health, Department of Pediatrics
[3] Royal Children’s Hospital,School of Pediatrics
[4] Santa Maria Hospital,Department of Pediatrics
[5] Lisbon Academic Center,Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Instituto de Medicina Molecular
[6] Universidade de Lisboa,School of Pediatrics
[7] Royal Children’s Hospital,Department of Pediatrics
[8] Hospital Santa Maria (CHLN),undefined
[9] Lisbon Academic Center,undefined
来源：
BMC Medical Research Methodology | / 18卷
关键词：
Systematic review; Pediatrics; Child; Methods;
D O I：
暂无
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A descriptive analysis of non-Cochrane child-relevant systematic reviews published in 2014
    Gates, Michelle
    Elliott, Sarah A.
    Johnson, Cydney
    Thomson, Denise
    Williams, Katrina
    Fernandes, Ricardo M.
    Hartling, Lisa
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2018, 18
  • [2] A descriptive analysis of child-relevant systematic reviews in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
    Bow S.
    Klassen J.
    Chisholm A.
    Tjosvold L.
    Thomson D.
    Klassen T.P.
    Moher D.
    Hartling L.
    [J]. BMC Pediatrics, 10 (1)
  • [3] Descriptive analysis of cochrane child-relevant systematic reviews: an update and comparison between 2009 and 2013
    Crick, Katelynn
    Thomson, Denise
    Fernandes, Ricardo M.
    Nuspl, Megan
    Eurich, Dean T.
    Rowe, Brian H.
    Hartling, Lisa
    [J]. BMC PEDIATRICS, 2017, 17
  • [4] Descriptive analysis of cochrane child-relevant systematic reviews: an update and comparison between 2009 and 2013
    Katelynn Crick
    Denise Thomson
    Ricardo M. Fernandes
    Megan Nuspl
    Dean T. Eurich
    Brian H. Rowe
    Lisa Hartling
    [J]. BMC Pediatrics, 17
  • [5] Cochrane Reviews are not perfect - but generally better than non-Cochrane systematic reviews
    Bollig, Claudia
    Rueschemeyer, Georg
    Meerpohl, Joerg J.
    [J]. SUCHT-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR WISSENSCHAFT UND PRAXIS, 2020, 66 (03): : 170 - 172
  • [6] Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in leading orthodontic journals: a quality paradigm?
    Fleming, Padhraig S.
    Seehra, Jadbinder
    Polychronopoulou, Argy
    Fedorowicz, Zbys
    Pandis, Nikolaos
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 2013, 35 (02) : 244 - 248
  • [7] Quality of Cochrane reviews - Quality of Cochrane reviews is better than that of non-Cochrane reviews
    Petticrew, M
    Wilson, P
    Wright, K
    Song, FJ
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 324 (7336): : 545 - 545
  • [8] Frequency of use of the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2) in Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews published in 2023 and 2024
    Sandoval-Lentisco, Alejandro
    Lopez-Lopez, Jose A.
    Sanchez-Meca, Julio
    [J]. RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2024,
  • [9] Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in assisted reproductive technologies
    Windsor, B.
    Popovich, I.
    Jordan, V.
    Showell, M.
    Shea, B.
    Farquhar, C.
    [J]. HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2012, 27 (12) : 3460 - 3466
  • [10] Comparison of non-Cochrane systematic reviews and their published protocols: differences occurred frequently but were seldom explained
    Koensgen, Nadja
    Rombey, Tanja
    Allers, Katharina
    Mathes, Tim
    Hoffmann, Falk
    Pieper, Dawid
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2019, 110 : 34 - 41
12345