Systematic Reviews Should Not Be Assumed to Be Systematic and Comprehensive.

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology - Netherlands
doi 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.08.001
Full Text
Abstract

Available in full text

Categories
Epidemiology
Date
Authors
Publisher

Elsevier BV

Related search

Risk Compensation Theory Should Be Subject to Systematic Reviews of the Scientific Evidence

Injury Prevention
EnvironmentalPublic HealthOccupational Health
2001English

Consensus May Not Be Systematic

Evidence-Based Dentistry
Dentistry
2002English

Low-Positive Histoplasma Antigen Results in the MVista Assay Should Not Be Assumed to Be False Positive

Journal of Clinical Microbiology
Microbiology
2014English

Reply to "Low-Positive Histoplasma Antigen Results in the MVista Assay Should Not Be Assumed to Be False Positive"

Journal of Clinical Microbiology
Microbiology
2014English

Can Systematic Reviews With Sparse Data Be Trusted?

Anaesthesia
AnesthesiologyPain Medicine
2016English

Which Information Sources Should Be Used to Identify Studies for Systematic Reviews of Economic Evaluations in Healthcare?

Value in Health
MedicineHealth PolicyPublic HealthOccupational HealthEnvironmental
2017English

Assessment of the Importance of Double-Blinding Should Be Based on Systematic Reviews: A Rebuttal

Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis
MedicineHematology
2008English

‘It Should Be Okay to Not Be a Vet 24/7’

Veterinary Record
MedicineVeterinary
2019English

Communication Should Not Be Left to Scientists

Nature
Multidisciplinary
2002English

Amanote Research

Note-taking for researchers

Follow Amanote

© 2024 Amaplex Software S.P.R.L. All rights reserved.

Privacy PolicyRefund Policy