Reporting of health equity considerations in cluster and individually randomized trials
- Standort
-
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek Frankfurt am Main
- ISSN
-
1745-6215
- Umfang
-
Online-Ressource
- Sprache
-
Englisch
- Anmerkungen
-
online resource.
- Erschienen in
-
Reporting of health equity considerations in cluster and individually randomized trials ; volume:21 ; number:1 ; day:3 ; month:4 ; year:2020 ; pages:1-12 ; date:12.2020
Trials ; 21, Heft 1 (3.4.2020), 1-12, 12.2020
- Urheber
-
Petkovic, Jennifer
Jull, Janet
Yoganathan, Manosila
Dewidar, Omar
Baird, Sarah
Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
Johansson, Kjell Arne
Kristjansson, Elizabeth
McGowan, Jessie
Moher, David
Petticrew, Mark
Robberstad, Bjarne
Shea, Beverley
Tugwell, Peter
Volmink, Jimmy
Wells, George A.
Whitehead, Margaret
Cuervo, Luis Gabriel
White, Howard
Taljaard, Monica
Welch, Vivian
- Beteiligte Personen und Organisationen
-
SpringerLink (Online service)
- DOI
-
10.1186/s13063-020-4223-5
- URN
-
urn:nbn:de:101:1-2020062118423312544233
- Rechteinformation
-
Open Access; Der Zugriff auf das Objekt ist unbeschränkt möglich.
- Letzte Aktualisierung
-
14.08.2025, 10:51 MESZ
Datenpartner
Dieses Objekt wird bereitgestellt von:
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. Bei Fragen zum Objekt wenden Sie sich bitte an den Datenpartner.
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. Bei Fragen zum Objekt wenden Sie sich bitte an den Datenpartner.
Beteiligte
- Petkovic, Jennifer
- Jull, Janet
- Yoganathan, Manosila
- Dewidar, Omar
- Baird, Sarah
- Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
- Johansson, Kjell Arne
- Kristjansson, Elizabeth
- McGowan, Jessie
- Moher, David
- Petticrew, Mark
- Robberstad, Bjarne
- Shea, Beverley
- Tugwell, Peter
- Volmink, Jimmy
- Wells, George A.
- Whitehead, Margaret
- Cuervo, Luis Gabriel
- White, Howard
- Taljaard, Monica
- Welch, Vivian
- SpringerLink (Online service)
Ähnliche Objekte (12)
Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
Steps toward more complete reporting of systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA)
Erratum: the National Institutes of Health and guidance for reporting preclinical research
Specifying and reporting complex behaviour change interventions: the need for a scientific method
Lead editorial: Trials – using the opportunities of electronic publishing to improve the reporting of randomised trials
The PRISMATIC project: protocol for a research programme on novel methods to improve reporting and peer review of systematic reviews of health evidence
Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews
Does updating improve the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews?
Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network
Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
Steps toward more complete reporting of systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA)
Erratum: the National Institutes of Health and guidance for reporting preclinical research
Specifying and reporting complex behaviour change interventions: the need for a scientific method
Lead editorial: Trials – using the opportunities of electronic publishing to improve the reporting of randomised trials
The PRISMATIC project: protocol for a research programme on novel methods to improve reporting and peer review of systematic reviews of health evidence
Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews
Does updating improve the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews?
Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network
Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
Steps toward more complete reporting of systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA)
Erratum: the National Institutes of Health and guidance for reporting preclinical research
Specifying and reporting complex behaviour change interventions: the need for a scientific method
Lead editorial: Trials – using the opportunities of electronic publishing to improve the reporting of randomised trials
The PRISMATIC project: protocol for a research programme on novel methods to improve reporting and peer review of systematic reviews of health evidence
Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews
Does updating improve the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews?