2009
DOI: 10.3736/jcim20090918
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (Chinese edition)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
292
0
16

Year Published

2009
2009
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 541 publications
(308 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
292
0
16
Order By: Relevance
“…The analysis was performed according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and the reporting was in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis (PRISMA) statement (Table S1).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The analysis was performed according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and the reporting was in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis (PRISMA) statement (Table S1).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…12 We submitted our formal review protocol to PROSPERO, including search strategy, primary outcomes, and study inclusion and exclusion criteria.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are only a few brief AMSTAR abstracts published in the Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine (Xiong & Du, 2010;Xiong & Cheng, 2011), and the PRISMA statement (Chinese edition) was published in the Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine in September 2009 (Moher & Alessandro, 2009). This, together with the lack of overall reporting quality, suggests that reporting guidelines have not been well promoted in China.…”
Section: Implications For Nurses Researchers and Journal Editorsmentioning
confidence: 99%