Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1111/jebm.12426 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1111/jebm.12426 33595200!8013525!33595200     free     free     free Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=33595200&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 225.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 225.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 225.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 225.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 225.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 225.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       J+Evid+Based+Med 2021 ; 14 (1): 56-64 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33595200|t=2021. The mass production of systematic reviews about COVID-19: An analysis of PROSPERO records |pdf=|usr=}}{{33595200}} gab.com Text The mass production of systematic reviews about COVID-19: An analysis of PROSPERO records JO: J Evid Based Med http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33595200 #FOAvip OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the characteristics of different designs of systematic reviews (SRs) registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) about COVID-19. METHODS: The search was performed in the PROSPERO database using the strategy proposed by the database and considered only human studies. The last date of the search was April 27, 2020. Full text of all records was accessed, and data were extracted by a single researcher, which was further double-checked by another researcher. A descriptive analysis was performed considering record characteristics using tables. RESULTS: We included 564 records from which the vast majority were registered as SRs (n = 513, 91%). In general, we found poor reporting and missing or confusing information, since 84% of the records (n = 474) did not report the full search that would be adopted, 16% (n = 90) did not report clearly the databases that would be used, and 49.1% (n = 277) did not report the number of primary outcomes. The main focus of most of the records involved clinical, epidemiological, complication, and laboratory characteristics (n = 173, 30.7%) or the treatment of COVID-19 (n = 138, 24.5%). CONCLUSION: A large number of SRs about COVID-19 have been conducted, and many of the assessed records were poorly reported and would be difficult to replicate. Besides, collected data points to an epidemic of redundant reviews on COVID-19. Twit Text FOAVip The mass production of systematic reviews about COVID-19: An analysis of PROSPERO records ????J Evid Based Med http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33595200 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33595200 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33595200}}</ref> The mass production of systematic reviews about COVID-19: An analysis of PROSPERO records #MMPMID33595200 Dotto L; Kinalski MA; Machado PS; Pereira GKR; Sarkis-Onofre R; Dos Santos MBF J Evid Based Med 2021[Feb]; 14 (1): 56-64 PMID33595200show ga OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the characteristics of different designs of systematic reviews (SRs) registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) about COVID-19. METHODS: The search was performed in the PROSPERO database using the strategy proposed by the database and considered only human studies. The last date of the search was April 27, 2020. Full text of all records was accessed, and data were extracted by a single researcher, which was further double-checked by another researcher. A descriptive analysis was performed considering record characteristics using tables. RESULTS: We included 564 records from which the vast majority were registered as SRs (n = 513, 91%). In general, we found poor reporting and missing or confusing information, since 84% of the records (n = 474) did not report the full search that would be adopted, 16% (n = 90) did not report clearly the databases that would be used, and 49.1% (n = 277) did not report the number of primary outcomes. The main focus of most of the records involved clinical, epidemiological, complication, and laboratory characteristics (n = 173, 30.7%) or the treatment of COVID-19 (n = 138, 24.5%). CONCLUSION: A large number of SRs about COVID-19 have been conducted, and many of the assessed records were poorly reported and would be difficult to replicate. Besides, collected data points to an epidemic of redundant reviews on COVID-19. |*COVID-19[MESH] |*Research Design[MESH] |*Systematic Reviews as Topic[MESH] |Bibliometrics[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Pandemics[MESH] |Pneumonia, Viral/virology[MESH]The mass production of systematic reviews about COVID-19: An analysis (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing