
doi: 10.3205/20ebm106
Background/research question: Readers of systematic reviews (SRs) and overview authors require valid, reliable, and practical means to evaluate the methodological quality and risk of bias of SRs. To evaluate and compare the interrater and inter-centre reliability, usability, and applicability[for full text, please go to the a.m. URL]
Nützliche patientenrelevante Forschung; 21. Jahrestagung des Deutschen Netzwerks Evidenzbasierte Medizin
ddc: 610, 610 Medical sciences; Medicine
ddc: 610, 610 Medical sciences; Medicine
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
