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 *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16582054)

  • 1. Patient preference randomised controlled trials in mental health research.
    Howard L; Thornicroft G
    Br J Psychiatry; 2006 Apr; 188():303-4. PubMed ID: 16582054
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Conceptual framework and systematic review of the effects of participants' and professionals' preferences in randomised controlled trials.
    King M; Nazareth I; Lampe F; Bower P; Chandler M; Morou M; Sibbald B; Lai R
    Health Technol Assess; 2005 Sep; 9(35):1-186, iii-iv. PubMed ID: 16153352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Partially randomised patient preference trials as an alternative design to randomised controlled trials: systematic review and meta-analyses.
    Wasmann KA; Wijsman P; van Dieren S; Bemelman W; Buskens C
    BMJ Open; 2019 Oct; 9(10):e031151. PubMed ID: 31619428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The impact of using a partially randomised patient preference design when evaluating alternative managements for heavy menstrual bleeding.
    Cooper KG; Grant AM; Garratt AM
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1997 Dec; 104(12):1367-73. PubMed ID: 9422014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. The impact of patient preference on the design and interpretation of clinical trials.
    Feine JS; Awad MA; Lund JP
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 1998 Feb; 26(1):70-4. PubMed ID: 9511845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Partially randomised patient preference trials.
    Brocklehurst P
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1997 Dec; 104(12):1332-5. PubMed ID: 9422008
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    Soll RF; Ovelman C; McGuire W
    Early Hum Dev; 2020 Nov; 150():105191. PubMed ID: 33036834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Rational centre selection for RCTs with a parallel economic evaluation--the next step towards increased generalisability?
    Gheorghe A; Roberts T; Pinkney TD; Morton DG; Calvert M
    Health Econ; 2015 Apr; 24(4):498-504. PubMed ID: 24523070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Patient preferences in randomised trials: threat or opportunity?
    Torgerson DJ; Klaber-Moffett J; Russell IT
    J Health Serv Res Policy; 1996 Oct; 1(4):194-7. PubMed ID: 10180870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Using randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to test service interventions: issues of standardisation, selection and generalisability.
    Watson B; Procter S; Cochrana W
    Nurse Res; 2004; 11(3):28-42. PubMed ID: 15065482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Incorporating patient preferences into randomized trials.
    Lambert MF; Wood J
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2000 Feb; 53(2):163-6. PubMed ID: 10729688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluating the Generalisability of Trial Results: Introducing a Centre- and Trial-Level Generalisability Index.
    Gheorghe A; Roberts T; Hemming K; Calvert M
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2015 Nov; 33(11):1195-214. PubMed ID: 26068945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A digital intake approach in specialized mental health care: study protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial.
    Metz MJ; Elfeddali I; Krol DG; Veerbeek MA; de Beurs E; Beekman AT; van der Feltz-Cornelis CM
    BMC Psychiatry; 2017 Mar; 17(1):86. PubMed ID: 28270129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Understanding controlled trials. What is a patient preference trial?
    Torgerson DJ; Sibbald B
    BMJ; 1998 Jan; 316(7128):360. PubMed ID: 9487173
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Internet trials: participant experiences and perspectives.
    Mathieu E; Barratt A; Carter SM; Jamtvedt G
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2012 Oct; 12():162. PubMed ID: 23092116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Timing of implant placement after tooth extraction: immediate, immediate-delayed or delayed implants? A Cochrane systematic review.
    Esposito M; Grusovin MG; Polyzos IP; Felice P; Worthington HV
    Eur J Oral Implantol; 2010; 3(3):189-205. PubMed ID: 20847990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Patient preferences and clinical trial design and interpretation: appreciation and critique of a paper by Feine, Awad & Lund.
    Bradley C
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 1999 Apr; 27(2):85-8. PubMed ID: 10226717
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Why all randomised controlled trials produce biased results.
    Krauss A
    Ann Med; 2018 Jun; 50(4):312-322. PubMed ID: 29616838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The impact of patient treatment preferences on the interpretation of randomised controlled trials.
    McPherson K; Britton A
    Eur J Cancer; 1999 Oct; 35(11):1598-602. PubMed ID: 10673968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.