For randomized controlled trials, the quality of reports of complementary and alternative medicine was as good as reports of conventional medicine
- 31 August 2005
- journal article
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Vol. 58 (8) , 763-768
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.08.020
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Systematic reviews involving complementary and alternative medicine interventions had higher quality of reporting than conventional medicine reviewsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2005
- Calidad de los ensayos clínicos publicados en España sobre el asma: comparación con los ensayos clínicos publicados en revistas anglosajonasArchivos de Bronconeumología, 2002
- Use of the CONSORT Statement and Quality of Reports of Randomized TrialsJAMA, 2001
- Value of Flow Diagrams in Reports of Randomized Controlled TrialsJAMA, 2001
- The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized TrialsAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2001
- Location bias in controlled clinical trials of complementary/alternative therapiesJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2000
- Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviewsThe Lancet, 1996
- Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?Controlled Clinical Trials, 1996
- Evidence based medicineBMJ, 1995
- Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trialsJAMA, 1995