Resources for authors of reports of randomized trials: harnessing the wisdom of authors, editors, and readers
- Location
-
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek Frankfurt am Main
- ISSN
-
1745-6215
- Extent
-
Online-Ressource
- Language
-
Englisch
- Notes
-
online resource.
- Bibliographic citation
-
Resources for authors of reports of randomized trials: harnessing the wisdom of authors, editors, and readers ; volume:12 ; number:1 ; day:19 ; month:4 ; year:2011 ; pages:1-3 ; date:12.2011
Trials ; 12, Heft 1 (19.4.2011), 1-3, 12.2011
- Creator
- Contributor
- DOI
-
10.1186/1745-6215-12-98
- URN
-
urn:nbn:de:1111-2016050220148
- Rights
-
Der Zugriff auf das Objekt ist unbeschränkt möglich.
- Last update
-
14.08.2025, 10:50 AM CEST
Data provider
This object is provided by:
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. If you have any questions about the object, please contact the data provider.
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. If you have any questions about the object, please contact the data provider.
Associated
- Moher, David
- Hopewell, Sally
- Schulz, Kenneth F.
- Altman, Douglas G.
- SpringerLink (Online service)
Other Objects (12)
Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers
Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to Authors'
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review
Helping editors, peer reviewers and authors improve the clarity, completeness and transparency of reporting health research
Update on the endorsement of CONSORT by high impact factor journals: a survey of journal “Instructions to Authors” in 2014
The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized 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)
Why prospective registration of systematic reviews makes sense
How can we improve the interpretation of systematic reviews?
Editors-in-chief perceptions of patients as (co) authors on publications and the acceptability of ICMJE authorship criteria: a cross-sectional survey
The PRISMATIC project: protocol for a research programme on novel methods to improve reporting and peer review of systematic reviews of health evidence
Erratum to: Thanks to all those who reviewed for systematic reviews in 2014
Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers
Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to Authors'
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review
Helping editors, peer reviewers and authors improve the clarity, completeness and transparency of reporting health research
Update on the endorsement of CONSORT by high impact factor journals: a survey of journal “Instructions to Authors” in 2014
The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized 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)
Why prospective registration of systematic reviews makes sense
How can we improve the interpretation of systematic reviews?
Editors-in-chief perceptions of patients as (co) authors on publications and the acceptability of ICMJE authorship criteria: a cross-sectional survey
The PRISMATIC project: protocol for a research programme on novel methods to improve reporting and peer review of systematic reviews of health evidence
Erratum to: Thanks to all those who reviewed for systematic reviews in 2014
Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers
Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to Authors'
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review
Helping editors, peer reviewers and authors improve the clarity, completeness and transparency of reporting health research
Update on the endorsement of CONSORT by high impact factor journals: a survey of journal “Instructions to Authors” in 2014
The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized 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)
Why prospective registration of systematic reviews makes sense
How can we improve the interpretation of systematic reviews?
Editors-in-chief perceptions of patients as (co) authors on publications and the acceptability of ICMJE authorship criteria: a cross-sectional survey
The PRISMATIC project: protocol for a research programme on novel methods to improve reporting and peer review of systematic reviews of health evidence