AntmanEMLauJKupelnickBet al.(1992) A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts: Treatments for myocardial infarction. Journal of the American Medical Association268(2): 240–248. DOI: 10.1001/jama.1992.03490020088036.
GreenhalghT (1997) How to read a paper: Papers that summarise other papers (systematic reviews and meta-analysis). British Medical Journal315: 672–675. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.672.
4.
Higgins JPT and Green S (eds) (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. Available at: http://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/ (accessed 12 June 2018).
5.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJet al.(2009) The PRISMA Group (2009) preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLOS Medicine6(7): e1000097, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
6.
MoonKGde GrootJABouwmeesterWet al.(2014) Critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies: The CHARMS checklist. PLOS Medicine11(10): e1001744, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001744.
7.
Murad M, Asi N, Alsawas M, et al. (2016) New evidence pyramid. Evidence Based Medicine 21: 125–127. DOI: 10.1136/ebmed-2016-110401.
8.
OxmanADGuyattGH (1993) The science of reviewing research. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences703: 125–133.
9.
Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, et al. (2017) Systematic reviews of effectiveness. In: Aromataris E and Munn Z (eds). Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer s Manual. Adelaide, South Australia: The Joanna Briggs Institute, University of Adelaide, chapter 3, Available at: https://reviewersmanual.joannabriggs.org/ (accessed 12 June 2018).
10.
U.S. National Library of Medicine (2015) Medical subject headings (MeSH). Available at: www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/meshhome.html (accessed 12 June 2018).
