Penny F. Whiting

Research topics

• Meta-analysis and systematic reviews · 5 papers
• Traumatic Brain Injury Research · 3 papers
• Delphi Technique in Research · 3 papers
• Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · 2 papers
• Primary Care and Health Outcomes · 1 paper
• Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills · 1 paper

Frequent co-authors

• Isabelle Boutron · 4 papers
• Asbjørn Hróbjartsson · 4 papers
• Matthew James Page · 3 papers
• Joanne E. McKenzie · 3 papers
• Patrick M. Bossuyt · 3 papers
• Tammy Hoffmann · 3 papers
• Cynthia D. Mulrow · 3 papers
• Larissa Shamseer · 3 papers

Papers

1. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviewsBMJ · 2021 · 107,350 citations

   The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances…

2. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventionsBMJ · 2016 · 20,382 citations

   Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In…

3. QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy StudiesAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2011 · 14,607 citations

   In 2003, the QUADAS tool for systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies was developed. Experience, anecdotal reports, and feedback suggested areas for improvement; therefore, QUADAS-2 was developed. This tool comprises 4 domains: patient selection, index test, reference standard, and flow…

4. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviewsInternational Journal of Surgery · 2021 · 11,970 citations

   The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances…

5. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviewsBMJ · 2021 · 11,889 citations

   The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings.The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was developed to facilitate…