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 *

306 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21410846)

  • 21. Validity and usability testing of a health systems guidance appraisal tool, the AGREE-HS.
    Brouwers MC; Ako-Arrey D; Spithoff K; Vukmirovic M; Florez ID; Lavis JN; Cluzeau F; Permanand G; Bosch-Capblanch X; Chen Y;
    Health Res Policy Syst; 2018 Jun; 16(1):51. PubMed ID: 29925394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Health-related quality of life in early breast cancer.
    Groenvold M
    Dan Med Bull; 2010 Sep; 57(9):B4184. PubMed ID: 20816024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Prioritizing guideline topics: development and evaluation of a practical tool.
    Ketola E; Toropainen E; Kaila M; Luoto R; Mäkelä M
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2007 Aug; 13(4):627-31. PubMed ID: 17683306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Reliability analysis for a proposed critical appraisal tool demonstrated value for diverse research designs.
    Crowe M; Sheppard L; Campbell A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2012 Apr; 65(4):375-83. PubMed ID: 22078576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews.
    Pluye P; Gagnon MP; Griffiths F; Johnson-Lafleur J
    Int J Nurs Stud; 2009 Apr; 46(4):529-46. PubMed ID: 19233357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. A comparative analysis of three online appraisal instruments' ability to assess validity in qualitative research.
    Hannes K; Lockwood C; Pearson A
    Qual Health Res; 2010 Dec; 20(12):1736-43. PubMed ID: 20671302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The development of a quality appraisal tool for studies of diagnostic reliability (QAREL).
    Lucas NP; Macaskill P; Irwig L; Bogduk N
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Aug; 63(8):854-61. PubMed ID: 20056381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Systematic review on embracing cultural diversity for developing and sustaining a healthy work environment in healthcare.
    Pearson A; Srivastava R; Craig D; Tucker D; Grinspun D; Bajnok I; Griffin P; Long L; Porritt K; Han T; Gi AA
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2007 Mar; 5(1):54-91. PubMed ID: 21631782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Assessing harmful effects in systematic reviews.
    McIntosh HM; Woolacott NF; Bagnall AM
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2004 Jul; 4():19. PubMed ID: 15260887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Development of a social inclusion index to capture subjective and objective life domains (Phase II): psychometric development study.
    Huxley P; Evans S; Madge S; Webber M; Burchardt T; McDaid D; Knapp M
    Health Technol Assess; 2012; 16(1):iii-vii, ix-xii, -1-241. PubMed ID: 22260923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Validity and reliability of the rapid assessment for adolescent preventive services adolescent health risk assessment.
    Salerno J; Marshall VD; Picken EB
    J Adolesc Health; 2012 Jun; 50(6):595-9. PubMed ID: 22626486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Clinical instruments: reliability and validity critical appraisal.
    Brink Y; Louw QA
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2012 Dec; 18(6):1126-32. PubMed ID: 21689217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews.
    Whiting P; Rutjes AW; Reitsma JB; Bossuyt PM; Kleijnen J
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2003 Nov; 3():25. PubMed ID: 14606960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The inter-rater and test-retest reliability of the Home Falls and Accidents Screening Tool.
    Vu TV; Mackenzie L
    Aust Occup Ther J; 2012 Jun; 59(3):235-42. PubMed ID: 22690774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Development and validation of a quality appraisal tool for validity studies (QAVALS).
    Gore S; Goldberg A; Huang MH; Shoemaker M; Blackwood J
    Physiother Theory Pract; 2021 May; 37(5):646-654. PubMed ID: 31246154
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A newly developed tool for classifying study designs in systematic reviews of interventions and exposures showed substantial reliability and validity.
    Seo HJ; Kim SY; Lee YJ; Jang BH; Park JE; Sheen SS; Hahn SK
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Feb; 70():200-5. PubMed ID: 26408805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The QATSDD critical appraisal tool: comments and critiques.
    Fenton L; Lauckner H; Gilbert R
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2015 Dec; 21(6):1125-8. PubMed ID: 26639174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Venous access in oncology and haematology patients: Part two.
    Wells S
    Nurs Stand; 2008 Sep 10-16; 23(1):35-42. PubMed ID: 18814475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [Qualitative Research in Health Services Research - Discussion Paper, Part 3: Quality of Qualitative Research].
    Stamer M; Güthlin C; Holmberg C; Karbach U; Patzelt C; Meyer T;
    Gesundheitswesen; 2015 Dec; 77(12):966-75. PubMed ID: 26714312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.