Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.2147/CLEP.S78879 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.2147/CLEP.S78879 C4386783!4386783!25878512     free     free     free Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=25878512&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\25878512.jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117       Clin+Epidemiol 2015 ; 7 (ä): 243-7 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=25878512|t=2015. Systematic reviews with language restrictions and no author contact have lower overall credibility: a methodology study |pdf=|usr=}}{{25878512}} gab.com Text Systematic reviews with language restrictions and no author contact have lower overall credibility: a methodology study JO: Clin Epidemiol http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=25878512 #FOAvip Background: High-quality systematic reviews (SRs) require rigorous approaches to identify, appraise, select, and synthesize research evidence relevant to a specific question. In this study, we evaluated the association between two steps in the conduct of an SR ? restricting the search to English, and author contact for missing data ? and the overall credibility of a SR. Methods: All SRs cited by the Endocrine Society?s Clinical Practice Guidelines published from October 2006 through January 2012 were included. The main outcome was the overall A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) score, as a surrogate of SR credibility. Nonparametric Kruskal?Wallis tests and multivariable linear regression models were used to investigate the association between language restriction, author contact for missing data, and the overall AMSTAR score. Results: In all, 69 SRs were included in the analysis. Only 31 SRs (45%) reported searching non-English literature, with an average AMSTAR score of 7.90 (standard deviation [SD] =1.64). SRs that reported language restriction received significantly lower AMSTAR scores (mean =5.25, SD =2.32) (P<0.001). Only 30 SRs (43%) reported contacting authors for missing data, and these received, on average, 2.59 more AMSTAR points (SD =1.95) than those who did not (P<0.001). In multivariable analyses, AMSTAR score was significantly correlated with language restriction (beta =?1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: ?2.62, ?0.01, P=0.05) and author contact for missing data (beta =2.16, 95% CI: 0.91, 3.41, P=0.001). However, after adjusting for compliance with reporting guidelines, language restriction was no longer significantly associated with the AMSTAR score. Conclusion: Fewer than half of the SRs conducted to support the clinical practice guidelines we examined reported contacting study authors or searched non?English literature. SRs that did not conduct these two steps had lower quality scores, suggesting the importance of these two steps for overall SR credibility. Twit Text FOAVip Systematic reviews with language restrictions and no author contact have lower overall credibility: a methodology study ????Clin Epidemiol http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=25878512 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=25878512 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|25878512}}</ref> Systematic reviews with language restrictions and no author contact have lower overall credibility: a methodology study #MMPMID25878512 Wang Z; Brito JP; Tsapas A; Griebeler ML; Alahdab F; Murad MH Clin Epidemiol 2015[]; 7 (ä): 243-7 PMID25878512show ga Background: High-quality systematic reviews (SRs) require rigorous approaches to identify, appraise, select, and synthesize research evidence relevant to a specific question. In this study, we evaluated the association between two steps in the conduct of an SR ? restricting the search to English, and author contact for missing data ? and the overall credibility of a SR. Methods: All SRs cited by the Endocrine Society?s Clinical Practice Guidelines published from October 2006 through January 2012 were included. The main outcome was the overall A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) score, as a surrogate of SR credibility. Nonparametric Kruskal?Wallis tests and multivariable linear regression models were used to investigate the association between language restriction, author contact for missing data, and the overall AMSTAR score. Results: In all, 69 SRs were included in the analysis. Only 31 SRs (45%) reported searching non-English literature, with an average AMSTAR score of 7.90 (standard deviation [SD] =1.64). SRs that reported language restriction received significantly lower AMSTAR scores (mean =5.25, SD =2.32) (P<0.001). Only 30 SRs (43%) reported contacting authors for missing data, and these received, on average, 2.59 more AMSTAR points (SD =1.95) than those who did not (P<0.001). In multivariable analyses, AMSTAR score was significantly correlated with language restriction (beta =?1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: ?2.62, ?0.01, P=0.05) and author contact for missing data (beta =2.16, 95% CI: 0.91, 3.41, P=0.001). However, after adjusting for compliance with reporting guidelines, language restriction was no longer significantly associated with the AMSTAR score. Conclusion: Fewer than half of the SRs conducted to support the clinical practice guidelines we examined reported contacting study authors or searched non?English literature. SRs that did not conduct these two steps had lower quality scores, suggesting the importance of these two steps for overall SR credibility. äSystematic reviews with language restrictions and no author contact ha(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing