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
211
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 · 87.674 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
2009 · 82.951 Zit.
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
1977 · 77.456 Zit.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
2009 · 63.171 Zit.
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
2003 · 61.855 Zit.