Literature DB >> 15879389

Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by high impact medical journals: survey of instructions for authors.

Douglas G Altman1.   

Abstract

Mesh：

Year:  2005        PMID： 15879389      PMCID： PMC557224          DOI： 10.1136/bmj.330.7499.1056

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN： 0959-8138


× No keyword cloud information.
  5 in total

Review 1.  The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  D G Altman; K F Schulz; D Moher; M Egger; F Davidoff; D Elbourne; P C Gøtzsche; T Lang
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2001-04-17       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Value of flow diagrams in reports of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  M Egger; P Jüni; C Bartlett
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-04-18       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation.

Authors:  D Moher; A Jones; L Lepage
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-04-18       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials.

Authors:  D Moher; K F Schulz; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-04-14       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  The reporting of methodological factors in randomized controlled trials and the association with a journal policy to promote adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist.

Authors:  P J Devereaux; Braden J Manns; William A Ghali; Hude Quan; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2002-08
  5 in total
  55 in total

1.  Do medical journals provide clear and consistent guidelines on authorship?

Authors:  Elizabeth Wager
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2007-07-19

2.  Is this clinical trial fully registered?

Authors:  Alain Braillon; Gérard Dubois
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2006-02-14       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  Randomized controlled trials in endourology: a quality assessment.

Authors:  Jung Ki Jo; Riccardo Autorino; Jae Hoon Chung; Kyu Shik Kim; Jeong Woo Lee; Eun Jung Baek; Seung Wook Lee
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2013-07-26       Impact factor: 2.942

Review 4.  Changes in clinical trials methodology over time: a systematic review of six decades of research in psychopharmacology.

Authors:  André R Brunoni; Laura Tadini; Felipe Fregni
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-03-03       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed.

Authors:  Sally Hopewell; Susan Dutton; Ly-Mee Yu; An-Wen Chan; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-23

Review 6.  Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research.

Authors:  Carol Kilkenny; William J Browne; Innes C Cuthill; Michael Emerson; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2010-06-29       Impact factor: 8.029

7.  Survey of the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting of research using animals.

Authors:  Carol Kilkenny; Nick Parsons; Ed Kadyszewski; Michael F W Festing; Innes C Cuthill; Derek Fry; Jane Hutton; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-11-30       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines.

Authors:  David Moher; Kenneth F Schulz; Iveta Simera; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2010-02-16       Impact factor: 11.069

Review 9.  Reporting randomised clinical trials of analgesics after traumatic or orthopaedic surgery is inadequate: a systematic review.

Authors:  Eva Montané; Antoni Vallano; Xavier Vidal; Cristina Aguilera; Joan-Ramon Laporte
Journal:  BMC Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2010-01-12

10.  Evaluating systematic reviews in urology: A practical guide.

Authors:  Prathap Tharyan
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2007-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.