Paul Glasziou

Research interests

Publications

• The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity

  PLoS Biology · 2020 · https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000737

• Evidence for overuse of medical services around the world

  The Lancet · 2017 · 10.1016/s0140-6736(16)32585-5

• Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

  BMJ · 2016 · https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4098

• STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies

  BMJ · 2015 · https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h5527

• Use of GRADE for assessment of evidence about prognosis: rating confidence in estimates of event rates in broad categories of patients

  BMJ · 2015 · https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h870

• STARD 2015: An Updated List of Essential Items for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies

  Radiology · 2015 · https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015151516

• Prevalence of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

  PEDIATRICS · 2015 · 10.1542/peds.2014-3482

• Biomedical research: Increasing value, reducing waste

  e-publications@bond (Bond University) · 2014

• Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide

  BMJ · 2014 · https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g1687

• Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research

  The Lancet · 2014 · 10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62228-x

• GRADE guidelines: 12. Preparing Summary of Findings tables—binary outcomes

  Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2012 · 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.01.012

• GRADE guidelines: 11. Making an overall rating of confidence in effect estimates for a single outcome and for all outcomes

  Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2012 · 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.01.006

• GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence

  Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2011 · 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.06.004

• GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency

  Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2011 · https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.03.017

• GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction—GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables

  Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2011 · https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026

• Chapter 12: Interpreting results and drawing conclusions

  Journal · 2011

• GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes

  Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2010 · 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.09.012

• Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up?

  PLoS Medicine · 2010 · 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326

• Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence

  The Lancet · 2009 · https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60329-9

• No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations

  The Lancet · 2009 · 10.1016/s0140-6736(09)61116-8

• Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies

  BMJ · 2008 · 10.1136/bmj.39500.677199.ae

• Cochrane Systematic Review of Colorectal Cancer Screening Using the Fecal Occult Blood Test (Hemoccult): An Update

  The American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2008 · 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.01875.x

• Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult

  Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2007 · 10.1002/14651858.cd001216.pub2

• Sicily statement on evidence-based practice

  BMC Medical Education · 2005 · 10.1186/1472-6920-5-1

• Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy.

  PubMed · 2003 · 10.1373/49.1.1

Current projects

No projects listed.