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 *

216 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16052184)

  • 1. Systematic reviews incorporating evidence from nonrandomized study designs: reasons for caution when estimating health effects.
    Reeves BC; van Binsbergen J; van Weel C
    Eur J Clin Nutr; 2005 Aug; 59 Suppl 1():S155-61. PubMed ID: 16052184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reasons for caution when evaluating health care interventions using non-randomised study designs.
    Reeves BC
    Forsch Komplementarmed Klass Naturheilkd; 2004 Aug; 11 Suppl 1():40-5. PubMed ID: 15353902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Epidemiologic studies: pitfalls in interpretation.
    Westhoff CL
    Dialogues Contracept; 1995; 4(5):5-6, 8. PubMed ID: 12288680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evidence-based periodontology, systematic reviews and research quality.
    Needleman I; Moles DR; Worthington H
    Periodontol 2000; 2005; 37():12-28. PubMed ID: 15655022
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The application of quantitative methods for identifying and exploring the presence of bias in systematic reviews: PDE-5 inhibitors for erectile dysfunction.
    Bekkering GE; Abou-Setta AM; Kleijnen J
    Int J Impot Res; 2008; 20(3):264-77. PubMed ID: 18059501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Systematic reviews of low back pain prognosis had variable methods and results: guidance for future prognosis reviews.
    Hayden JA; Chou R; Hogg-Johnson S; Bombardier C
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Aug; 62(8):781-796.e1. PubMed ID: 19136234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Deconstructing evidence in orthodontics: making sense of systematic reviews, randomized clinical trials, and meta-analyses.
    Rinchuse DJ; Rinchuse DJ; Kandasamy S; Ackerman MB
    World J Orthod; 2008; 9(2):167-76. PubMed ID: 18575311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The regression effect as a neglected source of bias in nonrandomized intervention trials and systematic reviews of observational studies.
    Weeks DL
    Eval Health Prof; 2007 Sep; 30(3):254-65. PubMed ID: 17693618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Eur J Health Econ; 2008 Nov; 9 Suppl 1():5-29. PubMed ID: 18987905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management, part I: introduction and general considerations.
    Manchikanti L
    Pain Physician; 2008; 11(2):161-86. PubMed ID: 18354710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bias: a review of current understanding.
    Adebiyi AO
    Afr J Med Med Sci; 2010 Sep; 39(3):241-8. PubMed ID: 21416795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. AHRQ series paper 4: assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the effective health-care program.
    Chou R; Aronson N; Atkins D; Ismaila AS; Santaguida P; Smith DH; Whitlock E; Wilt TJ; Moher D
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 May; 63(5):502-12. PubMed ID: 18823754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. In an empirical evaluation of the funnel plot, researchers could not visually identify publication bias.
    Terrin N; Schmid CH; Lau J
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2005 Sep; 58(9):894-901. PubMed ID: 16085192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany].
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2008 Dec; 133 Suppl 7():S225-46. PubMed ID: 19034813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Bias in research.
    Agabegi SS; Stern PJ
    Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ); 2008 May; 37(5):242-8. PubMed ID: 18587501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Meta-analysis in medical research: potentials and limitations.
    Zwahlen M; Renehan A; Egger M
    Urol Oncol; 2008; 26(3):320-9. PubMed ID: 18452828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. How to use a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
    Tseng TY; Dahm P; Poolman RW; Preminger GM; Canales BJ; Montori VM
    J Urol; 2008 Oct; 180(4):1249-56. PubMed ID: 18707741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A meta-regression analysis shows no impact of design characteristics on outcome in trials on tension-type headaches.
    Verhagen AP; de Vet HC; Willemsen S; Stijnen T
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Aug; 61(8):813-8. PubMed ID: 18359608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Practice of systematic reviews. VI. Searching, selection and methodological evaluation of etiological research].
    van der Windt DA; Zeegers MP; Kemper HC; Assendelft WJ; Scholten RJ
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Jun; 144(25):1210-4. PubMed ID: 10897300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.