National Institutes of Health. Rigor and reproducibility. Online document at: www.nih.gov/research-training/rigor-reproducibility, accessed March24, 2021.
2.
National Institutes of Health. Guidance: rigor and reproducibility in grant applications. Online document at: https://grants.nih.gov/policy/reproducibility/guidance.htm, accessed March24, 2021.
3.
FangFC, SteenRG, CasadevallA. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012; 10917028–33.
4.
HofsethLJ. Getting rigorous with scientific rigor. Carcinogenesis. 2018; 39:21–25.
5.
SchmidtS. Shall we really do it again? The powerful concept of replication is neglected in the social sciences. Rev Gen Psychol. 2009; 13:90–100.
6.
IoannidisJPA. Why most clinical research is not useful. PLoS Med. 2016; 13:e1002049.
7.
Wikipedia. Alternative medicine. Online document at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_medicine, accessed March24, 2021.
8.
AhnE, KangH. Introduction to systematic review and meta-analysis. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2018; 71:103–112.
9.
ChandlerJ, CumpstonM, ThomasJ, HigginsJPT, DeeksJJ, ClarkeMJ. Chapter I: Introduction. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.2 (updated February 2021). Cochrane, 2021. Online document at: www.training.cochrane.org/handbook, accessed April1, 2021.
