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 *

907 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16014203)

  • 1. Indirect comparisons of competing interventions.
    Glenny AM; Altman DG; Song F; Sakarovitch C; Deeks JJ; D'Amico R; Bradburn M; Eastwood AJ;
    Health Technol Assess; 2005 Jul; 9(26):1-134, iii-iv. PubMed ID: 16014203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomised and non-randomised studies.
    MacLehose RR; Reeves BC; Harvey IM; Sheldon TA; Russell IT; Black AM
    Health Technol Assess; 2000; 4(34):1-154. PubMed ID: 11134917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses.
    Song F; Altman DG; Glenny AM; Deeks JJ
    BMJ; 2003 Mar; 326(7387):472. PubMed ID: 12609941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Response to letter to the editor from Dr Rahman Shiri: The challenging topic of suicide across occupational groups.
    Niedhammer I; Milner A; Witt K; Klingelschmidt J; Khireddine-Medouni I; Alexopoulos EC; Toivanen S; Chastang JF; LaMontagne AD
    Scand J Work Environ Health; 2018 Jan; 44(1):108-110. PubMed ID: 29218357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of conference abstracts and presentations with full-text articles in the health technology assessments of rapidly evolving technologies.
    Dundar Y; Dodd S; Dickson R; Walley T; Haycox A; Williamson PR
    Health Technol Assess; 2006 Feb; 10(5):iii-iv, ix-145. PubMed ID: 16487455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topotecan for ovarian cancer.
    Forbes C; Shirran L; Bagnall AM; Duffy S; ter Riet G
    Health Technol Assess; 2001; 5(28):1-110. PubMed ID: 11701100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Indirect comparisons of treatments based on systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials.
    Edwards SJ; Clarke MJ; Wordsworth S; Borrill J
    Int J Clin Pract; 2009 Jun; 63(6):841-54. PubMed ID: 19490195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Randomised controlled trials for policy interventions: a review of reviews and meta-regression.
    Oliver S; Bagnall AM; Thomas J; Shepherd J; Sowden A; White I; Dinnes J; Rees R; Colquitt J; Oliver K; Garrett Z
    Health Technol Assess; 2010 Mar; 14(16):1-165, iii. PubMed ID: 20338119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Indirect comparisons: a review of reporting and methodological quality.
    Donegan S; Williamson P; Gamble C; Tudur-Smith C
    PLoS One; 2010 Nov; 5(11):e11054. PubMed ID: 21085712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Indirect comparisons of therapeutic interventions.
    Schöttker B; Lühmann D; Boulkhemair D; Raspe H
    GMS Health Technol Assess; 2009 Jul; 5():Doc09. PubMed ID: 21289896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Inconsistency between direct and indirect comparisons of competing interventions: meta-epidemiological study.
    Song F; Xiong T; Parekh-Bhurke S; Loke YK; Sutton AJ; Eastwood AJ; Holland R; Chen YF; Glenny AM; Deeks JJ; Altman DG
    BMJ; 2011 Aug; 343():d4909. PubMed ID: 21846695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Methodological problems in the use of indirect comparisons for evaluating healthcare interventions: survey of published systematic reviews.
    Song F; Loke YK; Walsh T; Glenny AM; Eastwood AJ; Altman DG
    BMJ; 2009 Apr; 338():b1147. PubMed ID: 19346285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies.
    Deeks JJ; Dinnes J; D'Amico R; Sowden AJ; Sakarovitch C; Song F; Petticrew M; Altman DG; ;
    Health Technol Assess; 2003; 7(27):iii-x, 1-173. PubMed ID: 14499048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives.
    Brookes ST; Whitley E; Peters TJ; Mulheran PA; Egger M; Davey Smith G
    Health Technol Assess; 2001; 5(33):1-56. PubMed ID: 11701102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Systematic reviews of the effectiveness of day care for people with severe mental disorders: (1) acute day hospital versus admission; (2) vocational rehabilitation; (3) day hospital versus outpatient care.
    Marshall M; Crowther R; Almaraz-Serrano A; Creed F; Sledge W; Kluiter H; Roberts C; Hill E; Wiersma D; Bond GR; Huxley P; Tyrer P
    Health Technol Assess; 2001; 5(21):1-75. PubMed ID: 11532238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A systematic review and economic evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of aldosterone antagonists for postmyocardial infarction heart failure.
    McKenna C; Burch J; Suekarran S; Walker S; Bakhai A; Witte K; Harden M; Wright K; Woolacott N; Lorgelly P; Fenwick L; Palmer S
    Health Technol Assess; 2010 May; 14(24):1-162. PubMed ID: 20492762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.
    Manchikanti L; Datta S; Smith HS; Hirsch JA
    Pain Physician; 2009; 12(5):819-50. PubMed ID: 19787009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 46.