Published in BMJ on July 19, 2006
CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ (2010) 28.70
The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ (2009) 22.18
The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med (2009) 21.74
Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med (2007) 10.43
CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med (2008) 5.85
False-positive results in cancer epidemiology: a plea for epistemological modesty. J Natl Cancer Inst (2008) 3.72
Definition, reporting, and interpretation of composite outcomes in clinical trials: systematic review. BMJ (2010) 3.46
Misrepresentation of randomized controlled trials in press releases and news coverage: a cohort study. PLoS Med (2012) 3.33
Modelling the effects of subjective and objective decision making in scientific peer review. Nature (2013) 1.73
Modified intention to treat reporting in randomised controlled trials: systematic review. BMJ (2010) 1.59
A surge of p-values between 0.041 and 0.049 in recent decades (but negative results are increasing rapidly too). PeerJ (2015) 1.02
Common statistical and research design problems in manuscripts submitted to high-impact medical journals. BMC Res Notes (2011) 0.99
Assessment of vibration of effects due to model specification can demonstrate the instability of observational associations. J Clin Epidemiol (2015) 0.93
Seven mistakes and potential solutions in epidemiology, including a call for a World Council of Epidemiology and Causality. Emerg Themes Epidemiol (2009) 0.83
The distribution of probability values in medical abstracts: an observational study. BMC Res Notes (2015) 0.80
Readers as research detectives. Trials (2009) 0.78
Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement. PLoS One (2017) 0.75
Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA (2004) 23.87
Epidemiology faces its limits. Science (1995) 12.39
Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CMAJ (2004) 10.75
Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials. Lancet (2000) 9.80
Sifting the evidence-what's wrong with significance tests? BMJ (2001) 9.50
Statistical problems in the reporting of clinical trials. A survey of three medical journals. N Engl J Med (1987) 8.64
Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2007) 7.52
Methodology and overt and hidden bias in reports of 196 double-blind trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritis. Control Clin Trials (1989) 6.48
Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. BMJ (2005) 5.36
Issues in the reporting of epidemiological studies: a survey of recent practice. BMJ (2004) 4.69
Randomization, statistics, and causal inference. Epidemiology (1990) 4.16
The use of transformation when comparing two means. BMJ (1996) 3.22
Data dredging, bias, or confounding. BMJ (2002) 2.87
Is the clinical trial evidence about new drugs statistically adequate? Br J Clin Pharmacol (1985) 2.01
Blinding during data analysis and writing of manuscripts. Control Clin Trials (1996) 1.40
Citation bias of hepato-biliary randomized clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol (2002) 1.36
Sample size of randomized double-blind trials 1976-1991. Dan Med Bull (1996) 1.25