Recommendations for a correct report of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Downloads
References
1. De León Fierro L, Rodríguez-Villalobos J, Candia-Luján R, Carrasco-Legleu C, Enriquez del Castillo L. Efectividad de los suplementos antioxidantes en la mejoría del desempeño físico atlético. Rev haban cienc méd 2019;18(2):194–216.
2. Ferreira González I, Urrútia G, Alonso-Coello P, Ferreira González I, Urrútia G A-CP. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis: scientific rationale and interpretation. Rev española Cardiol. 2011 Aug;64(8):688–96.
3. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):1–6.
4. García-Perdomo HA. Evidence synthesis and meta-analysis: a practical approach. Int J Urol Nurs. 2016 Jul 28;10(1):30–6.
5. García-Perdomo HA. Network meta-analysis, a new statistical technique at urologists’ disposal to improve decision making. Int Braz J Urol. 2018;44(3):422–8.
6. Garcia-Perdomo H. Enhancing the quality and transparency of systematic reviews. Colomb Med. 2018;49(4):251–3.
7. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:1–9.
8. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D. Preferred reporting ítems for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ Br Med J. 2009;339:b2535.
9. Page MJ, Altman DG, McKenzie JE, Shamseer L, Ahmadzai N, Wolfe D, et al. Flaws in the application and interpretation of statistical analyses in systematic reviews of therapeutic interventions were common: a cross-sectional analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;95:7–18. Revista Anales de la Academia de Ciencias de Cuba. 2012; 2(2): 1-15.
Download PDF
