296 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19281584)
1. Gynaecologists blaze the trail in primary studies and systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy.
Johnson NP; Khan KS
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 2009 Feb; 49(1):71-6. PubMed ID: 19281584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. [Quality of diagnostic accuracy studies: QUADAS (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Included in Systematic Reviews)].
Schuetz GM; Tackmann R; Hamm B; Dewey M
Rofo; 2010 Nov; 182(11):939-42. PubMed ID: 20922647
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 5. Diagnostic accuracy studies.
Manchikanti L; Derby R; Wolfer L; Singh V; Datta S; Hirsch JA
Pain Physician; 2009; 12(3):517-40. PubMed ID: 19461821
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [Systematic reviews of studies of diagnostic test accuracy].
Moreno G G; Pantoja C T
Rev Med Chil; 2009 Feb; 137(2):303-7. PubMed ID: 19543656
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Understanding systematic reviews and meta-analysis.
Akobeng AK
Arch Dis Child; 2005 Aug; 90(8):845-8. PubMed ID: 16040886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Exploring sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic tests.
Lijmer JG; Bossuyt PM; Heisterkamp SH
Stat Med; 2002 Jun; 21(11):1525-37. PubMed ID: 12111918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. We should not pool diagnostic likelihood ratios in systematic reviews.
Zwinderman AH; Bossuyt PM
Stat Med; 2008 Feb; 27(5):687-97. PubMed ID: 17611957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Getting to grips with systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Davies HT; Crombie IK
Hosp Med; 1998 Dec; 59(12):955-8. PubMed ID: 10696361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cochrane reviews used more rigorous methods than non-Cochrane reviews: survey of systematic reviews in physiotherapy.
Moseley AM; Elkins MR; Herbert RD; Maher CG; Sherrington C
J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Oct; 62(10):1021-30. PubMed ID: 19282144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. High prevalence but low impact of data extraction and reporting errors were found in Cochrane systematic reviews.
Jones AP; Remmington T; Williamson PR; Ashby D; Smyth RL
J Clin Epidemiol; 2005 Jul; 58(7):741-2. PubMed ID: 15939227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of diagnostic tests.
Halligan S
Clin Radiol; 2005 Sep; 60(9):977-9. PubMed ID: 16124979
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The challenge of systematic reviews of diagnostic and staging studies in cancer.
Lyman GH; Djulbegovic B
Cancer Treat Rev; 2005 Dec; 31(8):628-39. PubMed ID: 16225994
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Systematic reviews--triumph of form over substance?
Thomas L; Wilson JA
Clin Otolaryngol; 2006 Dec; 31(6):492-5. PubMed ID: 17184452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [The PRISMA Statement - what should be reported about systematic reviews?].
Antes G; von Elm E
Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2009 Aug; 134(33):1619. PubMed ID: 19650021
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 4. Assessing heterogeneity of primary studies in systematic reviews and whether to combine their results.
Hatala R; Keitz S; Wyer P; Guyatt G;
CMAJ; 2005 Mar; 172(5):661-5. PubMed ID: 15738493
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Editorial. Systematic review--what is it and how should it be used?
Gross A
Man Ther; 2004 Aug; 9(3):123-4. PubMed ID: 15245705
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Appraising systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Bigby M; Williams H
Arch Dermatol; 2003 Jun; 139(6):795-8. PubMed ID: 12810513
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
