Standout Papers
- The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)
- GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations (2008)
- GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction—GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables (2011)
- GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence (2011)
- Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes (2012)
- What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians? (2008)
- GRADE guidelines: A new series of articles in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (2010)
- GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) (2011)
- GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision (2011)
- GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency (2011)
- GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence—publication bias (2011)
- GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence—indirectness (2011)
- GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes (2010)
- Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (2009)
- Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement (2008)
- Going from evidence to recommendations (2008)
- Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies (2008)
- A pragmatic–explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers (2009)
- GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence (2011)
- Educational outreach visits: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (2007)
- GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations (2013)
- Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group (2004)
- GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation—determinants of a recommendation's direction and strength (2013)
- Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review (2002)
- GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction (2016)
- A checklist for identifying determinants of practice: A systematic review and synthesis of frameworks and taxonomies of factors that prevent or enable improvements in healthcare professional practice (2013)
- Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (2006)
- A Consumer's Guide to Subgroup Analyses (1992)
- Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results (2009)
- Validation of an index of the quality of review articles (1991)
- Users' Guides to the Medical Literature (1994)
- GRADE guidelines: 11. Making an overall rating of confidence in effect estimates for a single outcome and for all outcomes (2012)
- GRADE guidelines: 12. Preparing Summary of Findings tables—binary outcomes (2012)
- The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials (1998)
- Use of qualitative methods alongside randomised controlled trials of complex healthcare interventions: methodological study (2009)
- GRADE guidelines: 13. Preparing Summary of Findings tables and evidence profiles—continuous outcomes (2012)
- GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 2: Clinical practice guidelines (2016)
Immediate Impact
1 by Nobel laureates 2 from Science/Nature 173 standout
Citing Papers
Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries
2021 Standout
Management of frailty: opportunities, challenges, and future directions
2019 Standout
Works of Andrew D Oxman being referenced
GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence
2011 Standout
GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
2008 Standout
Author Peers
| Author | Last Decade | Papers | Cites | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andrew D Oxman | 18682 | 10554 | 17410 | 17864 | 282 | 102.0k | |
| Kenneth F. Schulz | 10713 | 8270 | 16049 | 16865 | 210 | 98.9k | |
| Mike Clarke | 12057 | 6735 | 15038 | 21439 | 582 | 119.1k | |
| Holger J. Schünemann | 9844 | 8513 | 14735 | 14708 | 693 | 82.6k | |
| Jan P. Vandenbroucke | 9765 | 5045 | 14038 | 21047 | 439 | 107.2k | |
| Erik von Elm | 9655 | 4953 | 12544 | 17890 | 130 | 86.0k | |
| Víctor M. Montori | 13626 | 6911 | 11803 | 13008 | 678 | 74.4k | |
| P.J. Devereaux | 7526 | 5097 | 10300 | 23695 | 395 | 91.9k | |
| Paul Glasziou | 11692 | 6976 | 10787 | 9945 | 622 | 64.4k | |
| Peter C Gøtzsche | 18184 | 10071 | 24974 | 39970 | 276 | 196.6k | |
| Jos Kleijnen | 7009 | 3607 | 9753 | 16793 | 312 | 86.4k |
All Works
Login with ORCID to disown or claim papers
Loading papers...