Industry-supported meta-analyses compared with meta-analyses with non-profit or no support: Differences in methodological quality and conclusions
Open Access
- 9 September 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Medical Research Methodology
- Vol. 8 (1) , 60-7
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-60
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 19 references indexed in Scilit:
- Financial ties and concordance between results and conclusions in meta-analyses: retrospective cohort studyBMJ, 2007
- Factors Associated with Findings of Published Trials of Drug–Drug Comparisons: Why Some Statins Appear More Efficacious than OthersPLoS Medicine, 2007
- The quality of reports of critical care meta-analyses in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: An independent appraisal*Critical Care Medicine, 2007
- Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: systematic reviewBMJ, 2006
- Cochrane Skin Group systematic reviews are more methodologically rigorous than other systematic reviews in dermatologyBritish Journal of Dermatology, 2006
- Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical surveyBMJ, 2004
- Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic reviewBMJ, 2003
- Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Clinical DecisionsAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1997
- Meta-analyses to evaluate analgesic interventions: A systematic qualitative review of their methodologyJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1996
- Validation of an index of the quality of review articlesPublished by Elsevier ,1991