Cargando…
Risk of bias tools in systematic reviews of health interventions: an analysis of PROSPERO-registered protocols
BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of health interventions are increasingly incorporating evidence outside of randomized controlled trials (RCT). While non-randomized study (NRS) types may be more prone to bias compared to RCT, the tools used to evaluate risk of bias (RoB) in NRS are less straightforwar...
Autores principales: | Farrah, Kelly, Young, Kelsey, Tunis, Matthew C., Zhao, Linlu |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6857304/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31730014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1172-8 |
Ejemplares similares
-
The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews
por: Booth, Alison, et al.
Publicado: (2012) -
Characteristics of systematic reviews evaluating treatments for COVID-19 registered in PROSPERO
por: Zhang, Ruinian, et al.
Publicado: (2021) -
Los libros del próspero Prospero's books
Publicado: (1991) -
PRISMA statement and PROSPERO
por: Bernardo, Wanderley Marques
Publicado: (2017) -
PROSPERO's systematic review protocols of traditional Chinese medicine for COVID-19: An overview
por: Hu, Haiyin, et al.
Publicado: (2021)