SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    Pildal J, Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Forfang E, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC. Comparison of descriptions of allocation concealment in trial protocols and the published reports: cohort study. BMJ 2005; 330: 1049.
  • 2
    Pildal J, Hrobjartsson A, Jorgensen KJ, Hilden J, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC. Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol 2007; 36: 847.
  • 3
    Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med 2001; 135: 982.
  • 4
    Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 1998; 352: 609.
  • 5
    Kane RL, Wang J, Garrard J. Reporting in randomized clinical trials improved after adoption of the CONSORT statement. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60: 241.
  • 6
    Barcena L, Pengel L, Morris PJ. Registry of randomized controlled trials in transplantation. Transplantation 2005; 80: 1525.
  • 7
    Morris PJ. Quality of randomized trials in solid organ transplantation. Transplantation 2005; 80: 431.
  • 8
    Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Assessing the quality of randomised controlled trials. In: EggerM, SmithGD, AltmanDG, eds. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 2001: 87.
  • 9
    Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1.
  • 10
    Balasubramanian SP, Wiener M, Alshameeri Z, Tiruvoipati R, Elbourne D, Reed MW. Standards of reporting of randomized controlled trials in general surgery: can we do better? Ann Surg 2006; 244: 663.
  • 11
    Juni P, Holenstein F, Sterne J, Bartlett C, Egger M. Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study. Int J Epidemiol 2002; 31: 115.
  • 12
    Hopewell S, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF. Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal ‘Instructions to Authors’. Trials 2008; 9: 20.
  • 13
    Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 2003; 326: 1167.
  • 14
    Clifford TJ, Barrowman NJ, Moher D. Funding source, trial outcome and reporting quality: are they related? Results of a pilot study. BMC Health Serv Res 2002; 2: 18.
  • 15
    Morris PJ, Ploeg RJ. Help in the design and reporting of randomized controlled trials: a collaboration between ESOT and CET towards a knowledge centre for European transplantations. Transpl Int 2008; 21: 511.
  • 16
    Barcena L, Pengel L, Morris PJ. Searching the transplantation library. Transplantation 2008; 85: 1068.
  • 17
    Netto GJ, Watkins DL, Williams JW, et al. Interobserver agreement in hepatitis C grading and staging and in the Banff grading schema for acute cellular rejection: the “hepatitis C 3” multi-institutional trial experience. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006; 130: 1157.
  • 18
    Wabbijn M, Balk AH, Van Domburg RT, et al. Ten-year follow-up of recipients of a kidney or heart transplant who received induction therapy with a monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-2 receptor. Exp Clin Transplant 2004; 2: 201.