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 *

73 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20566266)

  • 1. Pre-notification did not increase response rate in addition to follow-up: a randomized trial.
    Hammink A; Giesen P; Wensing M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Nov; 63(11):1276-8. PubMed ID: 20566266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Factorial trial found mixed evidence of effects of pre-notification and pleading on response to Web-based survey.
    Felix LM; Burchett HE; Edwards PJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 May; 64(5):531-6. PubMed ID: 20850270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluating telephone follow-up of a mail survey of community pharmacies.
    Westrick SC; Mount JK
    Res Social Adm Pharm; 2007 Jun; 3(2):160-82. PubMed ID: 17561218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. No increase in response rate by adding a web response option to a postal population survey: a randomized trial.
    Brøgger J; Nystad W; Cappelen I; Bakke P
    J Med Internet Res; 2007 Dec; 9(5):e40. PubMed ID: 18174120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Initial nonresponders had an increased response rate after repeated questionnaire mailings.
    Wensing M; Schattenberg G
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2005 Sep; 58(9):959-61. PubMed ID: 16085200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effectiveness of notification and group education in modifying prescribing of regulated analgesics.
    Anderson JF; McEwan KL; Hrudey WP
    CMAJ; 1996 Jan; 154(1):31-9. PubMed ID: 8542565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Does a deadline improve men's participation in self-administered health surveys? A randomized controlled trial in general practice.
    Gattellari M; Ward JE
    J Public Health (Oxf); 2004 Dec; 26(4):384-7. PubMed ID: 15598859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Prospective comparison of endoscopy patient satisfaction surveys: e-mail versus standard mail versus telephone.
    Harewood GC; Yacavone RF; Locke GR; Wiersema MJ
    Am J Gastroenterol; 2001 Dec; 96(12):3312-7. PubMed ID: 11774942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessing the impact of attrition in randomized controlled trials.
    Hewitt CE; Kumaravel B; Dumville JC; Torgerson DJ;
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Nov; 63(11):1264-70. PubMed ID: 20573482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Can systematic general health screening and patient-physician health discussions improve the cardiovascular profile of the population? A randomized controlled trial in general practice with a 5-year follow-up].
    Engberg M; Christensen B; Karlsmose B; Lous J; Lauritzen T
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2002 Jun; 164(25):3354-60. PubMed ID: 12107951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of breast cancer patient satisfaction with follow-up in primary care versus specialist care: results from a randomized controlled trial.
    Grunfeld E; Fitzpatrick R; Mant D; Yudkin P; Adewuyi-Dalton R; Stewart J; Cole D; Vessey M
    Br J Gen Pract; 1999 Sep; 49(446):705-10. PubMed ID: 10756611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Lottery incentives did not improve response rate to a mailed survey: a randomized controlled trial.
    Harris IA; Khoo OK; Young JM; Solomon MJ; Rae H
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Jun; 61(6):609-10. PubMed ID: 18471665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. "Just Another Statistic".
    Machtay M; Glatstein E
    Oncologist; 1998; 3(3):III-IV. PubMed ID: 10388105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Physical activity promotion in primary care: bridging the gap between research and practice.
    Eakin EG; Brown WJ; Marshall AL; Mummery K; Larsen E
    Am J Prev Med; 2004 Nov; 27(4):297-303. PubMed ID: 15488359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Improving outcomes after myocardial infarction: a randomized controlled trial evaluating effects of a telephone follow-up intervention.
    Hanssen TA; Nordrehaug JE; Eide GE; Hanestad BR
    Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil; 2007 Jun; 14(3):429-37. PubMed ID: 17568244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effectiveness of telephone prompts when surveying general practitioners: a randomised trial.
    Osborn M; Ward J; Boyle C
    Aust Fam Physician; 1996 Jan; Suppl 1():S41-3. PubMed ID: 9479799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Electronic mail was not better than postal mail for surveying residents and faculty.
    Akl EA; Maroun N; Klocke RA; Montori V; Schünemann HJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2005 Apr; 58(4):425-9. PubMed ID: 15862729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Shortening a survey and using alternative forms of prenotification: impact on response rate and quality.
    Beebe TJ; Rey E; Ziegenfuss JY; Jenkins S; Lackore K; Talley NJ; Locke RG
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2010 Jun; 10():50. PubMed ID: 20529365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effectiveness of data collection and information transmission process for disease notification in Anambra State, Nigeria.
    Nnebue CC; Onwasigwe CN; Ibeh CC; Adogu PO
    Niger J Clin Pract; 2013; 16(4):483-9. PubMed ID: 23974744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Prenotification had no additional effect on the response rate and survey quality: a randomized trial.
    Xie Y; Ho SC
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 Dec; 66(12):1422-6. PubMed ID: 23742789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.