Clinical study report data did not substantially alter point estimates but improved precision in a nephrology systematic review
Authors:
- Julian HirtJHJulian Hirt
- Dawid PieperDPDawid Pieper
- Monika BeckerMBMonika Becker
- Jessica BreuingJBJessica Breuing
- Mark R. MarshallMMMark R. Marshall
- Käthe GoossenKGKäthe Goossen
Open Access
- 26 June 2025
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Vol. 185
Abstract
No abstract availableFunding Information
- Baxter International
This publication has 44 references indexed in Scilit:
- Accessibility of clinical study reports supporting medicine approvals: a cross-sectional evaluationJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2024
- Substantial delays in clinical data published by the European Medicines Agency – a cross sectional studyJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2022
- No inexplicable disagreements between real-world data–based nonrandomized controlled studies and randomized controlled trials were foundJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2021
- Investigating and dealing with publication bias and other reporting biases in meta‐analyses of health research: A reviewResearch Synthesis Methods, 2020
- Identification and impact of outcome selection bias in meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2004
- Effect of icodextrin on volume status, blood pressure and echocardiographic parameters: A randomized studyKidney International, 2003
- A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of icodextrin in peritoneal dialysisAmerican Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2002
- Early quality of life benefits of icodextrin in peritoneal dialysisKidney International, 2002
- Efficacy and safety of a 7.5% icodextrin peritoneal dialysis solution in patients treated with automated peritoneal dialysisAmerican Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2002
- A randomized multicenter clinical trial comparing isosmolar Icodextrin with hyperosmolar glucose solutions in CAPDKidney International, 1994