2021
Effects of Experimental Interventions to Improve the Biomedical Peer‐Review Process: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Gaudino M, Robinson NB, Di Franco A, Hameed I, Naik A, Demetres M, Girardi LN, Frati G, Fremes SE, Biondi‐Zoccai G. Effects of Experimental Interventions to Improve the Biomedical Peer‐Review Process: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis. Journal Of The American Heart Association 2021, 10: e019903. PMID: 34278828, PMCID: PMC8475712, DOI: 10.1161/jaha.120.019903.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsStandardized mean differenceRandomized trialsEffects of interventionsPeer review interventionMean changeMAIN OUTCOMESmall studySystematic reviewMeta-AnalysisMean differenceLonger durationExperimental interventionInterventionIndividual studiesTrialsFurther studiesImproved qualityDurationConclusion ModificationReview qualitySignificant improvementPeer review processBackground quality
2020
An assessment of the quality of current clinical meta-analyses
Hameed I, Demetres M, Tam DY, Rahouma M, Khan FM, Wright DN, Mages K, DeRosa AP, Baltich Nelson B, Pain K, Delgado D, Girardi LN, Fremes SE, Gaudino M. An assessment of the quality of current clinical meta-analyses. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2020, 20: 105. PMID: 32380945, PMCID: PMC7204021, DOI: 10.1186/s12874-020-00999-9.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsSystematic reviewPreferred Reporting ItemsElectronic search strategyOverall median scoreMeta-analysis characteristicsCochrane HandbookMethodological qualityBackgroundThe objectiveReporting ItemsConclusionThis studyMeta-AnalysisMedian scoreClinical journalsEarly involvementStrict adherenceScoresMedical librariansInvolvement of librariansInformation specialistsOverall qualityGuidelinesReviewMultiple regressionPRISMAQuality scores