Development of a quality assessment tool for systematic reviews of observational studies (QATSO) of HIV prevalence in men having sex with men and associated risk behaviours
暂无分享,去创建一个
Catherine S. K. Cheung | G. Hart | W. Wong | Graham J Hart | William CW Wong | Catherine SK Cheung | C. S. Cheung
[1] P. Croft,et al. Quality assessment of observational studies is not commonplace in systematic reviews. , 2006, Journal of clinical epidemiology.
[2] Bei-chuan Zhang,et al. MSM and HIV/AIDS in China , 2005, Cell Research.
[3] J. Higgins,et al. Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography. , 2007, International journal of epidemiology.
[4] Matthias Egger,et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies , 2007, PLoS medicine.
[5] I. Olkin,et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology - A proposal for reporting , 2000 .
[6] Douglas G Altman,et al. Systematic reviews of evaluations of prognostic variables , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.
[7] P. Flowers,et al. Men who have sex with men (MSM) in public sex environments (PSEs): A systematic review of quantitative literature , 2005, AIDS care.
[8] D. Colby,et al. Men who have sex with men and HIV in Vietnam: a review. , 2004, AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education.
[9] Douglas G. Altman,et al. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context: Second Edition , 2008 .
[10] N McKoy,et al. Systems to rate the strength of scientific evidence. , 2002, Evidence report/technology assessment.
[11] S. Pocock,et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. , 2007, Preventive medicine.
[12] N. Black,et al. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. , 1998, Journal of epidemiology and community health.
[13] F. Song,et al. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. , 2003, Health technology assessment.
[14] I. Olkin,et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement , 1999, The Lancet.