 Connection
Lisa Bero to Meta-Analysis as Topic
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Lisa Bero has written about Meta-Analysis as Topic.
|
|
| |
Connection Strength |
|
 |
|
 |
| |
3.652 |
|
|
|
-
Bero L. Meta-research matters: Meta-spin cycles, the blindness of bias, and rebuilding trust. PLoS Biol. 2018 04; 16(4):e2005972.
Score: 0.569
-
Schroll J, Bero L. Regulatory agencies hold the key to improving Cochrane reviews of drugs. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 20; 4:ED000098.
Score: 0.464
-
Bero LA. Why the Cochrane risk of bias tool should include funding source as a standard item. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 20; (12):ED000075.
Score: 0.423
-
Bero L, Busuttil G, Farquhar C, Koehlmoos TP, Moher D, Nylenna M, Smith R, Tovey D. Measuring the performance of the Cochrane library. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Nov 14; 12:ED000048.
Score: 0.392
-
Hart B, Lundh A, Bero L. Effect of reporting bias on meta-analyses of drug trials: reanalysis of meta-analyses. BMJ. 2012 Jan 03; 344:d7202.
Score: 0.369
-
Finley PR, Bero L. Clarification of study and citation. Arch Intern Med. 2007 Dec 10; 167(22):2531; author reply 2531-2.
Score: 0.279
-
Yank V, Rennie D, Bero LA. Financial ties and concordance between results and conclusions in meta-analyses: retrospective cohort study. BMJ. 2007 Dec 08; 335(7631):1202-5.
Score: 0.277
-
Turner K, Carboni-Jim?nez A, Benea C, Elder K, Levis B, Boruff J, Roseman M, Bero L, Lexchin J, Turner EH, Benedetti A, Thombs BD. Reporting of drug trial funding sources and author financial conflicts of interest in Cochrane and non-Cochrane meta-analyses: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2020 05 11; 10(5):e035633.
Score: 0.165
-
Korevaar E, Karahalios A, Forbes AB, Turner SL, McDonald S, Taljaard M, Grimshaw JM, Cheng AC, Bero L, McKenzie JE. Methods used to meta-analyse results from interrupted time series studies: A methodological systematic review protocol. F1000Res. 2020; 9:110.
Score: 0.162
-
Bero L. Getting the systematic review basics right helps clinical practice: 4 common pitfalls for systematic review authors to avoid. Br J Sports Med. 2019 Jan; 53(1):6-8.
Score: 0.139
-
Anglemyer A, Horvath HT, Bero L. Healthcare outcomes assessed with observational study designs compared with those assessed in randomized trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Apr 29; (4):MR000034.
Score: 0.108
-
Roseman M, Milette K, Bero LA, Coyne JC, Lexchin J, Turner EH, Thombs BD. Reporting of conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of trials of pharmacological treatments. JAMA. 2011 Mar 09; 305(10):1008-17.
Score: 0.087
-
Grimshaw J, McAuley LM, Bero LA, Grilli R, Oxman AD, Ramsay C, Vale L, Zwarenstein M. Systematic reviews of the effectiveness of quality improvement strategies and programmes. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Aug; 12(4):298-303.
Score: 0.051
-
Korevaar E, Karahalios A, Turner SL, Forbes AB, Taljaard M, Cheng AC, Grimshaw JM, Bero L, McKenzie JE. Methodological systematic review recommends improvements to conduct and reporting when meta-analyzing interrupted time series studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 05; 145:55-69.
Score: 0.046
-
Turner SL, Karahalios A, Forbes AB, Taljaard M, Grimshaw JM, Korevaar E, Cheng AC, Bero L, McKenzie JE. Creating effective interrupted time series graphs: Review and recommendations. Res Synth Methods. 2021 Jan; 12(1):106-117.
Score: 0.042
-
Benea C, Turner KA, Roseman M, Bero LA, Lexchin J, Turner EH, Thombs BD. Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009. Syst Rev. 2020 04 08; 9(1):77.
Score: 0.041
-
Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM, Harvey E, Oxman AD, Thomson MA. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Review Group. BMJ. 1998 Aug 15; 317(7156):465-8.
Score: 0.037
|
Connection Strength
The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.
Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.
|