World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
107
Citations
229049
World Ranking
6081
National Ranking
3256

Overview

Kenneth F. Schulz is affiliated with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the United States. Their research encompasses several fields and subfields, with a focus on topics related to clinical trials, health systems, and statistical methods.

The scientist has contributed significantly to the following main topics of work:

  • Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Delphi Technique in Research
  • Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes

Their research spans multiple subfields including:

  • Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty
  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • General Health Professions
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Kenneth F. Schulz has frequently published in these venues:

  • UNC Libraries
  • BMJ
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
  • JAMA
  • Nature Medicine

Frequent co-authors include:

  • David Moher
  • Sally Hopewell
  • Isabelle Boutron
  • Asbjørn Hróbjartsson
  • An-Wen Chan

Representative recent papers authored or co-authored by Kenneth F. Schulz include:

  • Guidelines for Reporting Trial Protocols and Completed Trials Modified Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Other Extenuating Circumstances, 2021, JAMA
  • CONSORT 2025 statement: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials, 2025, BMJ
  • An update to SPIRIT and CONSORT reporting guidelines to enhance transparency in randomized trials, 2022, Nature Medicine
  • CONSORT 2025 statement: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials, 2025, The Lancet
  • SPIRIT 2025 statement: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials, 2025, BMJ

Best Publications

  • The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

    Julian P T Higgins;Douglas G Altman;Peter C Gøtzsche;Peter Jüni

  • CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

    K F Schulz;D G Altman;D Moher

  • CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.

    Kenneth F Schulz;Douglas G Altman;David Moher;David Moher

  • Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement

    D Moher;A Liberati;J Tetzlaff;D G Altman

  • The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials.

    D Moher;K F Schulz;D G Altman

  • CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

    David Moher;Sally Hopewell;Kenneth F Schulz;Victor M. Montori

  • The consort statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials

    D Moher;K F Schulz;D Altman

  • Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials.

    Kenneth F. Schulz;Iain Chalmers;Richard J. Hayes;Douglas G. Altman

  • Spirit 2013 statement: Defining standard protocol items for clinical trials

    An Wen Chan;Jennifer M. Tetzlaff;Douglas G. Altman;Andreas Laupacis

  • The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials

    David Moher;Kenneth F Schulz;Douglas G Altman

  • SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials

    An Wen Chan;Jennifer M. Tetzlaff;Peter C. Gøtzsche;Douglas G. Altman

  • CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials.

    Kenneth F Schulz;Douglas G Altman;David Moher

  • Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement

    C Begg;M Cho;S Eastwood;R Horton

  • The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration

    Douglas G. Altman;Kenneth F. Schulz;David Moher;Matthias Egger

  • Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study.

    Lesley Wood;Matthias Egger;Lise Lotte Gluud;Kenneth F Schulz

  • Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration.

    Isabelle Boutron;David Moher;Douglas G Altman;Kenneth F Schulz

  • The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials

    David Moher;Kenneth F. Schulz;Douglas G. Altman

  • CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials

    Kenneth F Schulz;Douglas G Altman;David Moher

  • [CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)]

    David Moher;Sally Hopewell;Kenneth F Schulz;Victor Montori

  • CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials

    K F Schulz;D G Altman;D Moher;D Moher;V Barbour

Frequent Co-Authors

Douglas G. Altman
Douglas G. Altman University of Oxford
David A. Grimes
David A. Grimes University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
David Moher
David Moher Ottawa Hospital
Matthias Egger
Matthias Egger University of Bern
Sally Hopewell
Sally Hopewell University of Oxford
Diana Elbourne
Diana Elbourne London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
Mike Clarke
Mike Clarke Queen's University Belfast
John P. A. Ioannidis
John P. A. Ioannidis Stanford University
Richard J. Hayes
Richard J. Hayes London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

Interested in exploring alternative paths in the healthcare field? The growing availability of online programs allows you to balance study with work or family commitments, expanding your career options beyond traditional medical degrees.

For those looking to advance quickly, a healthcare administration associate degree online can prepare you for entry-level roles in medical offices and hospital administration. If you're already a registered nurse, consider programs like adn to np bridge programs, which help you move up seamlessly to nurse practitioner roles by bridging your ADN to an MSN.

Nutrition is another rewarding area. An online dietitian degree offers flexible learning for those wanting to become dietitians or nutrition counselors. For leadership ambitions, pursuing one of the online mha programs cahme accredited can open doors to upper-level management in hospitals and healthcare organizations.

Each pathway has distinct admission requirements and advantages, so consider your professional goals, current qualifications, and preferred area of healthcare as you choose your next step.

Best Scientists Citing Kenneth F. Schulz

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles