Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ https://dx.doi.org/1...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
https://dx.doi.org/10.3205/20e...
Conference object . 2020
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
German Medical Science
Conference object . 2020
License: CC BY
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

The reliability, usability, and applicability of tools to appraise quality and risk of bias in systematic reviews: a prospective evaluation of AMSTAR, AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS

Authors: Gates, M; Gates, A; Prediger, B; Becker, M; Duarte, G; Cary, M; Vandermeer, B; +3 Authors

The reliability, usability, and applicability of tools to appraise quality and risk of bias in systematic reviews: a prospective evaluation of AMSTAR, AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS

Abstract

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

Keywords

ddc: 610, 610 Medical sciences; Medicine

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    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
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
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).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
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.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities