Many Reviews Are Systematic but Some Are More Transparent and Completely Reported than Others

The PLoS Medicine Editors

PLOS Medicine, 2007, vol. 4, issue 3, 1-2

Abstract: The implications for PLoS Medicine and other journals of new research, published in this issue, showing that there are major variations in the reporting quality of systematic reviews.

Date: 2007
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040147 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/fil ... 40147&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pmed00:0040147

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040147

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS Medicine from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosmedicine ().