QUORUM
6
First published: 15 July 2005
No abstract is available for this article.
References
- 1
Cook, D. J.,
Guyatt, G. H.,
Ryan, G.,
Clifton, J.,
Buckingham, L.,
Willan, A.,
McIlroy, W. &
Oxman, A.
(1993).
Should unpublished data be included in meta-analyses? Current convictions and controversies,
Journal of the American Medical Association
269,
2749–2753.
- 2
Cook, D. J.,
Sackett, D. L. &
Spitzer, W.
(1995).
Methodologic guidelines for systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials in health care from the Potsdam consultation on meta-analysis,
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
48,
167–171.
- 3
McAuley, L.,
Pham, B.,
Tugwell, P. &
Moher, D.
(2000).
Does the inclusion of Grey literature influence the estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses?,
Lancet
356,
1228–1231.
- 4
Moher, D.,
Cook, D. J.,
Eastwood, S.,
Olkin, I,
Rennie, D.,
Stroup, D. F., for
the QUOROM Group
(1999).
Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials; the QUOROM statement,
Lancet
354,
1896–1899.
- 5
Sacks, H. S.,
Berrier, J.,
Reitman, D.,
Ancona-Berk, V. A. &
Chalmers, T. C.
(1987).
Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials,
New England Journal of Medicine
316,
450–455.
- 6
Sacks, H. S.,
Reitman, D.,
Pagano, D. &
Kupelnick, B.
(1996).
Meta-analysis: an update,
Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine
63,
216–224.
- 7
Shea, B.,
Dubé, C. &
Moher, D.
(2000).
Assessing the quality of reports of systematic reviews: the QUOROM statement compared to other tools, in
Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in Context,
2nd Ed.,
M. Egger,
G. Davey-Smith &
D. G. Altman, eds.
British Medical Journal Publishing Group,
London.
