248 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19528133)
1. Evaluating the benefit of event adjudication of cardiovascular outcomes in large simple RCTs.
Pogue J; Walter SD; Yusuf S
Clin Trials; 2009 Jun; 6(3):239-51. PubMed ID: 19528133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Meta-analysis of rare events: an update and sensitivity analysis of cardiovascular events in randomized trials of rosiglitazone.
Dahabreh IJ; Economopoulos K
Clin Trials; 2008; 5(2):116-20. PubMed ID: 18375649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Diagnostic criteria and adjudication process both determine published event-rates: the ACTION trial experience.
Kirwan BA; Lubsen J; de Brouwer S; Danchin N; Battler A; Bayes de Luna A; Dunselman PH; Glasser S; Koudstaal PJ; Sutton G; van Dalen FJ; Poole-Wilson PA;
Contemp Clin Trials; 2007 Nov; 28(6):720-9. PubMed ID: 17509947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Do we need to adjudicate major clinical events?
Granger CB; Vogel V; Cummings SR; Held P; Fiedorek F; Lawrence M; Neal B; Reidies H; Santarelli L; Schroyer R; Stockbridge NL; Feng Zhao
Clin Trials; 2008; 5(1):56-60. PubMed ID: 18283081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effects of long-term exposure to traffic-related air pollution on respiratory and cardiovascular mortality in the Netherlands: the NLCS-AIR study.
Brunekreef B; Beelen R; Hoek G; Schouten L; Bausch-Goldbohm S; Fischer P; Armstrong B; Hughes E; Jerrett M; van den Brandt P
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2009 Mar; (139):5-71; discussion 73-89. PubMed ID: 19554969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Variation in results from randomized, controlled trials: stochastic or systematic?
Jane-wit D; Horwitz RI; Concato J
J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Jan; 63(1):56-63. PubMed ID: 19740624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Robustness assessments are needed to reduce bias in meta-analyses that include zero-event randomized trials.
Keus F; Wetterslev J; Gluud C; Gooszen HG; van Laarhoven CJ
Am J Gastroenterol; 2009 Mar; 104(3):546-51. PubMed ID: 19262513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta-analysis of sparse data.
Sweeting MJ; Sutton AJ; Lambert PC
Stat Med; 2004 May; 23(9):1351-75. PubMed ID: 15116347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Meta-analysis of adverse cardiovascular outcomes associated with antecedent hypertension after myocardial infarction.
Chen G; Hemmelgarn B; Alhaider S; Quan H; Campbell N; Rabi D
Am J Cardiol; 2009 Jul; 104(1):141-7. PubMed ID: 19576336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Determining the most appropriate components for a composite clinical trial outcome.
Bethel MA; Holman R; Haffner SM; Califf RM; Huntsman-Labed A; Hua TA; McMurray J
Am Heart J; 2008 Oct; 156(4):633-40. PubMed ID: 18926145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Subgroup analyses in therapeutic cardiovascular clinical trials: are most of them misleading?
Hernández AV; Boersma E; Murray GD; Habbema JD; Steyerberg EW
Am Heart J; 2006 Feb; 151(2):257-64. PubMed ID: 16442886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Randomized trials of vitamin E in the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disease.
Eidelman RS; Hollar D; Hebert PR; Lamas GA; Hennekens CH
Arch Intern Med; 2004 Jul; 164(14):1552-6. PubMed ID: 15277288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Outcomes of perioperative beta-blockade in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: a meta-analysis.
Talati R; Reinhart KM; White CM; Phung OJ; Sedrakyan A; Kluger J; Coleman CI
Ann Pharmacother; 2009 Jul; 43(7):1181-8. PubMed ID: 19531697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Meta-analysis of well-designed nonrandomized comparative studies of surgical procedures is as good as randomized controlled trials.
Abraham NS; Byrne CJ; Young JM; Solomon MJ
J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Mar; 63(3):238-45. PubMed ID: 19716267
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evidence from crossover trials: empirical evaluation and comparison against parallel arm trials.
Lathyris DN; Trikalinos TA; Ioannidis JP
Int J Epidemiol; 2007 Apr; 36(2):422-30. PubMed ID: 17301102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Fixed vs random effects meta-analysis in rare event studies: the rosiglitazone link with myocardial infarction and cardiac death.
Shuster JJ; Jones LS; Salmon DA
Stat Med; 2007 Oct; 26(24):4375-85. PubMed ID: 17768699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Meta-analysis of individual patient data versus aggregate data from longitudinal clinical trials.
Jones AP; Riley RD; Williamson PR; Whitehead A
Clin Trials; 2009 Feb; 6(1):16-27. PubMed ID: 19254930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Can trial sequential monitoring boundaries reduce spurious inferences from meta-analyses?
Thorlund K; Devereaux PJ; Wetterslev J; Guyatt G; Ioannidis JP; Thabane L; Gluud LL; Als-Nielsen B; Gluud C
Int J Epidemiol; 2009 Feb; 38(1):276-86. PubMed ID: 18824467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Meta-analyses of chronic disease trials with competing causes of death may yield biased odds ratios.
Koller MT; Stijnen T; Steyerberg EW; Lubsen J
J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Apr; 61(4):365-72. PubMed ID: 18313561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
