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 *

232 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17040510)

  • 1. State-of-the-evidence reviews: advantages and challenges of including grey literature.
    Benzies KM; Premji S; Hayden KA; Serrett K
    Worldviews Evid Based Nurs; 2006; 3(2):55-61. PubMed ID: 17040510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical nursing and midwifery research: grey literature in African countries.
    Sun C; Dohrn J; Omoni G; Malata A; Klopper H; Larson E
    Int Nurs Rev; 2016 Mar; 63(1):104-10. PubMed ID: 26781365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: challenges and benefits.
    Mahood Q; Van Eerd D; Irvin E
    Res Synth Methods; 2014 Sep; 5(3):221-34. PubMed ID: 26052848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect?
    Allen D; Rixson L
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2008 Mar; 6(1):78-110. PubMed ID: 21631815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Systematic reviews for evidence-based management: how to find them and what to do with them.
    Chan KS; Morton SC; Shekelle PG
    Am J Manag Care; 2004 Nov; 10(11 Pt 1):806-12. PubMed ID: 15623270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: methodological approaches to evaluate the literature and establish best evidence.
    Skelly AC; Hashimoto RE; Norvell DC; Dettori JR; Fischer DJ; Wilson JR; Tetreault LA; Fehlings MG
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2013 Oct; 38(22 Suppl 1):S9-18. PubMed ID: 24026148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Challenges in systematic reviews of therapeutic devices and procedures.
    Hartling L; McAlister FA; Rowe BH; Ezekowitz J; Friesen C; Klassen TP
    Ann Intern Med; 2005 Jun; 142(12 Pt 2):1100-11. PubMed ID: 15968035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessing applicability when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program.
    Atkins D; Chang SM; Gartlehner G; Buckley DI; Whitlock EP; Berliner E; Matchar D
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Nov; 64(11):1198-207. PubMed ID: 21463926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Challenges in systematic reviews that evaluate drug efficacy or effectiveness.
    Santaguida PL; Helfand M; Raina P
    Ann Intern Med; 2005 Jun; 142(12 Pt 2):1066-72. PubMed ID: 15968031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Literature reviews: evolution of a research methodology.
    Evans D; Kowanko I
    Aust J Adv Nurs; 2000 Dec-2001 Feb; 18(2):33-8. PubMed ID: 11878498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Searching for systematic reviews.
    Murdoch NH
    Can Oncol Nurs J; 2004; 14(3):152-4, 156-9. PubMed ID: 15379374
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Challenges in systematic reviews that assess treatment harms.
    Chou R; Helfand M
    Ann Intern Med; 2005 Jun; 142(12 Pt 2):1090-9. PubMed ID: 15968034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Systematic reviews of health care interventions: an essential component of health sciences graduate programs.
    Peacock S; Forbes D
    Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh; 2004; 1():Article15. PubMed ID: 16646880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A process model for evidence-based literature syntheses.
    Rutledge DN; DePalma JA; Cunningham M
    Oncol Nurs Forum; 2004 May; 31(3):543-50. PubMed ID: 15146220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group to play a leading role in guiding the production of informed high-quality, timely research evidence syntheses.
    Garritty C; Stevens A; Gartlehner G; King V; Kamel C;
    Syst Rev; 2016 Oct; 5(1):184. PubMed ID: 27793186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Using evidence in pain practice: Part II: Interpreting and applying systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines.
    Chou R
    Pain Med; 2008; 9(5):531-41. PubMed ID: 18346061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Avoiding and identifying errors in health technology assessment models: qualitative study and methodological review.
    Chilcott J; Tappenden P; Rawdin A; Johnson M; Kaltenthaler E; Paisley S; Papaioannou D; Shippam A
    Health Technol Assess; 2010 May; 14(25):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-107. PubMed ID: 20501062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Update of strategies to translate evidence from cochrane musculoskeletal group systematic reviews for use by various audiences.
    Rader T; Pardo Pardo J; Stacey D; Ghogomu E; Maxwell LJ; Welch VA; Singh JA; Buchbinder R; Légaré F; Santesso N; Toupin April K; O'Connor AM; Wells GA; Winzenberg TM; Johnston R; Tugwell P;
    J Rheumatol; 2014 Feb; 41(2):206-15. PubMed ID: 24293571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.