Quality of reporting and fragility index for randomized controlled trials in the vesicoureteral reflux literature: where do we stand?
Authors:
- 1 May 2019
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Pediatric Urology
- Vol. 15 (3) , 204-212
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- The statistical significance of randomized controlled trial results is frequently fragile: a case for a Fragility IndexJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2014
- Quality of Reporting of Modern Randomized Controlled Trials in Medical Oncology: A Systematic ReviewJNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2012
- Methodological Concerns and Quality Appraisal of Contemporary Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Pediatric UrologyJournal of Urology, 2011
- Quality of Reporting in Randomized Trials Published in High-Quality Surgical JournalsJournal of the American College of Surgeons, 2009
- A Critical Assessment of the Quality of Reporting of Randomized, Controlled Trials in the Urology LiteratureJournal of Urology, 2007
- Randomized Controlled Trials in Pediatric Urology: Room for ImprovementJournal of Urology, 2006
- Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials Reporting in the Primary Treatment of Brain TumorsJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2006
- Comparison of descriptions of allocation concealment in trial protocols and the published reports: cohort studyBMJ, 2005
- Quality of Abstracts Describing Randomized Trials in the Proceedings of American Society of Clinical Oncology Meetings: Guidelines for Improved ReportingJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2004
- Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled TrialsJAMA, 1996