GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence--study limitations (risk of bias).

By G. Guyatt, Andrew D. Oxman, G. Vist, Regina Kunz, J. Brożek, P. Alonso-Coello, Victor M. Montori, Elie A. Akl, B. Djulbegovic, Y. Falck-Ytter and 5 more. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2011

2,570 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Systematic review of the relationships between physical activity and health indicators in the early years (0-4 years) (2017, background): “, inadequate control for key confounders) was assessed [32].”
Evaluating the Quality of Evidence from a Network Meta-Analysis (2014, methodology): “In the GRADE approach, randomized trials are evaluated according to generation of the allocation sequence, concealment of the allocation sequence, blinding, incomplete accounting of participants and outcome events, selective outcome reporting bias and other limitations [15].”
Guidelines for the Provision and Assessment of Nutrition Support Therapy in the Adult Critically Ill Patient: Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.). (2009, neutral): “J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2012; 73(6):1380–7; discussion 1387–8.”