These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
43. Open letter in response to the article in the Lancet. Swiss Association of Homoeopathic Physicians Explore (NY); 2006 Jan; 2(1):7. PubMed ID: 16781599 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
44. Assessment of bias in methodology for randomized controlled trials published on implant dentistry. Dumbrigue HB; Al-Bayat MI; Ng CC; Wakefield CW J Prosthodont; 2006; 15(4):257-63. PubMed ID: 16827739 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Sympathetic bias. Levy DM; Peart SJ Stat Methods Med Res; 2008 Jun; 17(3):265-77. PubMed ID: 17925315 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Bias introduced by conditioning on an intermediate variable: Comment on the article by Zhang et al. Zhu Y Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken); 2011 May; 63(5):784. PubMed ID: 21309007 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
47. The importance of preservation of the ethical principle of equipoise in the design of clinical trials: relative impact of the methodological quality domains on the treatment effect in randomized controlled trials. Djulbegovic B; Cantor A; Clarke M Account Res; 2003; 10(4):301-15. PubMed ID: 14989285 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. A note on randomization and selection bias in maintenance therapy clinical trials. Greenhouse JB; Meyer MM Psychopharmacol Bull; 1991; 27(3):225-9. PubMed ID: 1775592 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. In response to: Grunkemeier GL, Starr A. Alternatives to randomization in surgical studies. Wheatley DJ J Heart Valve Dis; 1993 Mar; 2(2):248. PubMed ID: 8261164 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. Randomised controlled trials - the gold standard for effectiveness research: Study design: randomised controlled trials. Hariton E; Locascio JJ BJOG; 2018 Dec; 125(13):1716. PubMed ID: 29916205 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. Concerns about run-in periods in randomized trials. Glynn RJ; Buring JE; Hennekens CH JAMA; 1998 May; 279(19):1526; author reply 1527. PubMed ID: 9605892 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. Twenty-six assumptions that have to be met if single random assignment experiments are to warrant "gold standard" status: A commentary on Deaton and Cartwright. Cook TD Soc Sci Med; 2018 Aug; 210():37-40. PubMed ID: 29778288 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. The history and fate of the gold standard. Jones DS; Podolsky SH Lancet; 2015 Apr; 385(9977):1502-3. PubMed ID: 25933270 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. Getting off the "gold standard": randomized controlled trials and education research. Sullivan GM J Grad Med Educ; 2011 Sep; 3(3):285-9. PubMed ID: 22942950 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
57. A meta-epidemiological study to examine the association between bias and treatment effects in neonatal trials. Bialy L; Vandermeer B; Lacaze-Masmonteil T; Dryden DM; Hartling L Evid Based Child Health; 2014 Dec; 9(4):1052-9. PubMed ID: 25504975 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]