165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14528620)
1. Explanations for improvement in both experimental and control groups.
Becker H; Roberts G; Voelmeck W
West J Nurs Res; 2003 Oct; 25(6):746-55. PubMed ID: 14528620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Two-group experimental designs.
Brink PJ
West J Nurs Res; 2003 Oct; 25(6):619-22. PubMed ID: 14528614
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. On the causal structure of information bias and confounding bias in randomized trials.
Shahar E; Shahar DJ
J Eval Clin Pract; 2009 Dec; 15(6):1214-6. PubMed ID: 20367730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Risk factors, confounding, and the illusion of statistical control.
Christenfeld NJ; Sloan RP; Carroll D; Greenland S
Psychosom Med; 2004; 66(6):868-75. PubMed ID: 15564351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Causal effects in clinical and epidemiological studies via potential outcomes: concepts and analytical approaches.
Little RJ; Rubin DB
Annu Rev Public Health; 2000; 21():121-45. PubMed ID: 10884949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Understanding research: 1. Methodologies used to answer research questions.
Baxter H
J Wound Care; 2001 Jul; 10(7):269-72. PubMed ID: 12964346
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical trial design for orthodontists.
Pandis N; Cobourne MT
J Orthod; 2013 Jun; 40(2):93-103. PubMed ID: 23794689
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Limitations of randomized clinical trials in chronic diseases: explanations and recommendations.
Pincus T
Adv Mind Body Med; 2002; 18(2):14-21. PubMed ID: 12629874
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Influence of treatment preferences on validity: a review.
Sidani S; Miranda J; Epstein D; Fox M
Can J Nurs Res; 2009 Dec; 41(4):52-67. PubMed ID: 20191713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Missing data in rheumatologic studies and the practical reality of modern approaches to the analysis of incomplete subject data: comment on the article by Baron et al and the editorial by Boers.
Steele R; Hudson M
Arthritis Rheum; 2008 Sep; 59(9):1367-8. PubMed ID: 18759312
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Making inferences on treatment effects from real world data: propensity scores, confounding by indication, and other perils for the unwary in observational research.
Freemantle N; Marston L; Walters K; Wood J; Reynolds MR; Petersen I
BMJ; 2013 Nov; 347():f6409. PubMed ID: 24217206
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Redefining the randomized controlled trial in the context of acupuncture research.
Walji R; Boon H
Complement Ther Clin Pract; 2006 May; 12(2):91-6. PubMed ID: 16648085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Case study: design? Method? Or comprehensive strategy?
Jones C; Lyons C
Nurse Res; 2004; 11(3):70-6. PubMed ID: 15065485
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Confounding in health research.
Greenland S; Morgenstern H
Annu Rev Public Health; 2001; 22():189-212. PubMed ID: 11274518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Adjustments for center in multicenter studies: an overview.
Localio AR; Berlin JA; Ten Have TR; Kimmel SE
Ann Intern Med; 2001 Jul; 135(2):112-23. PubMed ID: 11453711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Improving the quality of reporting in randomised controlled trials.
Walker A; Nixon J
J Wound Care; 2004 Mar; 13(3):103-6. PubMed ID: 15045804
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Mega-trials: methodological issues and clinical implications.
Charlton BG
J R Coll Physicians Lond; 1995; 29(2):96-100. PubMed ID: 7595900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Observational studies versus RCTs: what about socioeconomic factors?
Rosén M; Axelsson S; Lindblom J
Lancet; 2009 Jun; 373(9680):2026. PubMed ID: 19524779
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessing quality of nursing care as a confounding variable in an outcome study on neurodevelopmental treatment.
Hafsteinsdóttir TB; Kruitwagen C; Strijker K; van der Weide L; Grypdonck MH
J Nurs Care Qual; 2007; 22(4):371-7. PubMed ID: 17873736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
