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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

79 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15284329)

  • 21. Can quality of clinical trials and meta-analyses be quantified?
    Ioannidis JP; Lau J
    Lancet; 1998 Aug; 352(9128):590-1. PubMed ID: 9746014
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Should meta-analyses of interventions include observational studies in addition to randomized controlled trials? A critical examination of underlying principles.
    Shrier I; Boivin JF; Steele RJ; Platt RW; Furlan A; Kakuma R; Brophy J; Rossignol M
    Am J Epidemiol; 2007 Nov; 166(10):1203-9. PubMed ID: 17712019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Postal surveys of physicians gave superior response rates over telephone interviews in a randomized trial.
    Hocking JS; Lim MS; Read T; Hellard M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2006 May; 59(5):521-4. PubMed ID: 16632141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Increasing response to mailed questionnaires by including a pencil/pen.
    White E; Carney PA; Kolar AS
    Am J Epidemiol; 2005 Aug; 162(3):261-6. PubMed ID: 15972931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Allocation concealment in clinical trials.
    Schulz KF; Altman DG; Moher D
    JAMA; 2002 Nov; 288(19):2406-7; author reply 2408-9. PubMed ID: 12435253
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. "You decide doctor". What do patient preference arms in clinical trials really mean?
    Bowling A; Rowe G
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 2005 Nov; 59(11):914-5. PubMed ID: 16234414
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Robustness assessments are needed to reduce bias in meta-analyses that include zero-event randomized trials.
    Keus F; Wetterslev J; Gluud C; Gooszen HG; van Laarhoven CJ
    Am J Gastroenterol; 2009 Mar; 104(3):546-51. PubMed ID: 19262513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. [Importance of a wide perspective on meta-analysis. It may be of crucial significance for the patients].
    Gøtzsche PC
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2000 Oct; 162(42):5601. PubMed ID: 11059294
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Participation bias in postal surveys among older adults: the role played by self-reported health, physical functional decline and frailty.
    Barreto Pde S
    Arch Gerontol Geriatr; 2012; 55(3):592-8. PubMed ID: 22534027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Increasing the response rates of reluctant professionals to mail surveys.
    Murphy CA
    Appl Nurs Res; 1993 Aug; 6(3):137-41. PubMed ID: 8239643
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis.
    Tierney JF; Stewart LA
    Int J Epidemiol; 2005 Feb; 34(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 15561753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Observational studies and randomized trials.
    Kunz R; Khan KS; Neumayer HH
    N Engl J Med; 2000 Oct; 343(16):1194-5; author reply 1196-7. PubMed ID: 11041757
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. A quest for questionnaires.
    Booth A
    Health Info Libr J; 2003 Mar; 20(1):53-6. PubMed ID: 12641531
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A randomized trial of mailed questionnaires versus telephone interviews: response patterns in a survey.
    Feveile H; Olsen O; Hogh A
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2007 Jun; 7():27. PubMed ID: 17592653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Danger of misuse of meta-analyses for observational studies based on published data.
    Sauerbrei W; Blettner M
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2000; 77():33. PubMed ID: 11187567
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Association between unreported outcomes and effect size estimates in Cochrane meta-analyses.
    Furukawa TA; Watanabe N; Omori IM; Montori VM; Guyatt GH
    JAMA; 2007 Feb; 297(5):468-70. PubMed ID: 17284696
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Comparing and selecting patient satisfaction questionnaires.
    Trandel-Kornechuk DM
    Med Group Manage J; 1998; 45(3):66-8, 70, 72-7. PubMed ID: 10181641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The effects of patients' and practitioners' preferences on randomized clinical trials.
    King M
    Palliat Med; 2000 Nov; 14(6):539-42. PubMed ID: 11219886
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Effect of prize draw incentive on the response rate to a postal survey of obstetricians and gynaecologists: a randomised controlled trial. [ISRCTN32823119].
    Moses SH; Clark TJ
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2004 Jun; 4(1):14. PubMed ID: 15222889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Meta-analysis and meta-analytic monitoring of clinical trials.
    Feinstein AR
    Stat Med; 1996 Jun; 15(12):1273-80; discussion 1281-3. PubMed ID: 8817801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.