Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Frequency of data extraction errors and methods to increase data extraction quality: a methodological review
209
Zitationen
3
Autoren
2017
Jahr
Abstract
The evidence base for established standards of data extraction seems weak despite the high prevalence of extraction errors. More comparative studies are needed to get deeper insights into the influence of different extraction methods.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
2021 · 86.482 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
2009 · 82.861 Zit.
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
1977 · 77.165 Zit.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
2009 · 62.983 Zit.
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
2003 · 61.676 Zit.