6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Adjuncts to Minimally Invasive Treatment of Urethral Stricture in Men

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions

              Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units (individuals or clusters of individuals) to comparison groups. The tool will be particularly useful to those undertaking systematic reviews that include non-randomised studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                European Urology
                European Urology
                Elsevier BV
                03022838
                October 2021
                October 2021
                : 80
                : 4
                : 467-479
                Article
                10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.022
                34275660
                cc1eb6f1-e9b8-4dcb-9eae-3d570302a5f5
                © 2021

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article