233 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16464427)
61. Explanation and Elaboration Document for the STROBE-Vet Statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology - Veterinary Extension.
O'Connor AM; Sargeant JM; Dohoo IR; Erb HN; Cevallos M; Egger M; Ersbøll AK; Martin SW; Nielsen LR; Pearl DL; Pfeiffer DU; Sanchez J; Torrence ME; Vigre H; Waldner C; Ward MP
Zoonoses Public Health; 2016 Dec; 63(8):662-698. PubMed ID: 27873473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
62. Application of the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement to publications on endoscopic treatment for vesicoureteral reflux.
Farrugia MK; Kirsch AJ
J Pediatr Urol; 2017 Jun; 13(3):320-325. PubMed ID: 28285865
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
63. Strengthening the Reporting of Molecular Epidemiology for Infectious Diseases (STROME-ID): an extension of the STROBE statement.
Field N; Cohen T; Struelens MJ; Palm D; Cookson B; Glynn JR; Gallo V; Ramsay M; Sonnenberg P; Maccannell D; Charlett A; Egger M; Green J; Vineis P; Abubakar I
Lancet Infect Dis; 2014 Apr; 14(4):341-52. PubMed ID: 24631223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
64. Impact of STROBE statement publication on quality of observational study reporting: interrupted time series versus before-after analysis.
Bastuji-Garin S; Sbidian E; Gaudy-Marqueste C; Ferrat E; Roujeau JC; Richard MA; Canoui-Poitrine F;
PLoS One; 2013; 8(8):e64733. PubMed ID: 23990867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
65. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology for respondent-driven sampling studies: "STROBE-RDS" statement.
White RG; Hakim AJ; Salganik MJ; Spiller MW; Johnston LG; Kerr L; Kendall C; Drake A; Wilson D; Orroth K; Egger M; Hladik W
J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Dec; 68(12):1463-71. PubMed ID: 26112433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
66. The quality of reporting in clinical research: the CONSORT and STROBE initiatives.
Bolignano D; Mattace-Raso F; Torino C; D'Arrigo G; Abd ElHafeez S; Provenzano F; Zoccali C; Tripepi G
Aging Clin Exp Res; 2013 Apr; 25(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 23740628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
67. Observational studies in orthopaedic surgery: the STROBE statement as a tool for transparent reporting.
Sheffler LC; Yoo B; Bhandari M; Ferguson T
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2013 Feb; 95(3):e14(1-12). PubMed ID: 23389794
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
68. How to submit to a scientific journal and get published.
Junaid J
J Pak Med Assoc; 2012 Sep; 62(9):977-8. PubMed ID: 23139992
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
69. [The reporting of observational studies: analysis using the STROBE statement].
Galera Llorca J; Lahoz Grillo R; Roig Loscertales F
Rev Esp Salud Publica; 2011 Dec; 85(6):583-91. PubMed ID: 22249589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
70. Reporting Quality of Observational Studies in Plastic Surgery Needs Improvement: A Systematic Review.
Agha RA; Lee SY; Jeong KJ; Fowler AJ; Orgill DP
Ann Plast Surg; 2016 May; 76(5):585-9. PubMed ID: 25643190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
71. Quality of observational studies in prestigious journals of occupational medicine and health based on Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: a cross-sectional study.
Aghazadeh-Attari J; Mobaraki K; Ahmadzadeh J; Mansorian B; Mohebbi I
BMC Res Notes; 2018 May; 11(1):266. PubMed ID: 29720270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
72. A review found inadequate reporting of case-control studies of risk factors for pancreatic cancer.
MacCarthy A; Dhiman P; Kirtley S; Logullo P; Copsey B; Collins GS
J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 May; 133():32-42. PubMed ID: 33359318
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
73. The STROBE guidelines.
Cuschieri S
Saudi J Anaesth; 2019 Apr; 13(Suppl 1):S31-S34. PubMed ID: 30930717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
74. [Diagnostic (STARD) and prognostic (REMARK) studies].
Altman DG; Bossuyt PM; ;
Med Clin (Barc); 2005 Dec; 125 Suppl 1():49-55. PubMed ID: 16464428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
75. The making of STROBE.
Vandenbroucke JP
Epidemiology; 2007 Nov; 18(6):797-9. PubMed ID: 18049193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
76. Online survey about the STROBE statement highlighted diverging views about its content, purpose, and value.
Sharp MK; Glonti K; Hren D
J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Jul; 123():100-106. PubMed ID: 32259582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
77. [The reporting of observational studies: useful and appreciable recommendations for improvement].
Stehouwer CD
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2008 Jan; 152(4):182-4. PubMed ID: 18320940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
78. Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement.
Hendriksma M; Joosten MH; Peters JP; Grolman W; Stegeman I
PLoS One; 2017; 12(1):e0169316. PubMed ID: 28060869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
79. Quality of reporting of confounding remained suboptimal after the STROBE guideline.
Pouwels KB; Widyakusuma NN; Groenwold RH; Hak E
J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Jan; 69():217-24. PubMed ID: 26327488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
80. Using the STROBE statement: survey findings emphasized the role of journals in enforcing reporting guidelines.
Sharp MK; Bertizzolo L; Rius R; Wager E; Gómez G; Hren D
J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Dec; 116():26-35. PubMed ID: 31398440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
