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.
238 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21474279)
1. Different methods of allocation to groups in randomized trials are associated with different levels of bias. A meta-epidemiological study. Herbison P; Hay-Smith J; Gillespie WJ J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Oct; 64(10):1070-5. PubMed ID: 21474279 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials. Pildal J; Hróbjartsson A; Jørgensen KJ; Hilden J; Altman DG; Gøtzsche PC Int J Epidemiol; 2007 Aug; 36(4):847-57. PubMed ID: 17517809 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Single-center trials show larger treatment effects than multicenter trials: evidence from a meta-epidemiologic study. Dechartres A; Boutron I; Trinquart L; Charles P; Ravaud P Ann Intern Med; 2011 Jul; 155(1):39-51. PubMed ID: 21727292 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Eliminating bias in randomized controlled trials: importance of allocation concealment and masking. Viera AJ; Bangdiwala SI Fam Med; 2007 Feb; 39(2):132-7. PubMed ID: 17273956 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomised controlled trials: combined analysis of meta-epidemiological studies. Savović J; Jones H; Altman D; Harris R; Jűni P; Pildal J; Als-Nielsen B; Balk E; Gluud C; Gluud L; Ioannidis J; Schulz K; Beynon R; Welton N; Wood L; Moher D; Deeks J; Sterne J Health Technol Assess; 2012 Sep; 16(35):1-82. PubMed ID: 22989478 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Randomization and allocation concealment: a practical guide for researchers. Doig GS; Simpson F J Crit Care; 2005 Jun; 20(2):187-91; discussion 191-3. PubMed ID: 16139163 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Compelling evidence from meta-epidemiological studies demonstrates overestimation of effects in randomized trials that fail to optimize randomization and blind patients and outcome assessors. Wang Y; Parpia S; Couban R; Wang Q; Armijo-Olivo S; Bassler D; Briel M; Brignardello-Petersen R; Gluud LL; Keitz SA; Letelier LM; Ravaud P; Schulz KF; Siemieniuk RAC; Zeraatkar D; Guyatt GH J Clin Epidemiol; 2024 Jan; 165():111211. PubMed ID: 37939743 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of descriptions of allocation concealment in trial protocols and the published reports: cohort study. Pildal J; Chan AW; Hróbjartsson A; Forfang E; Altman DG; Gøtzsche PC BMJ; 2005 May; 330(7499):1049. PubMed ID: 15817527 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The effect of bias on the magnitude of clinical outcomes in periodontology: a pilot study. Fenwick J; Needleman IG; Moles DR J Clin Periodontol; 2008 Sep; 35(9):775-82. PubMed ID: 18840153 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis. Tierney JF; Stewart LA Int J Epidemiol; 2005 Feb; 34(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 15561753 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An observational study found that authors of randomized controlled trials frequently use concealment of randomization and blinding, despite the failure to report these methods. Devereaux PJ; Choi PT; El-Dika S; Bhandari M; Montori VM; Schünemann HJ; Garg AX; Busse JW; Heels-Ansdell D; Ghali WA; Manns BJ; Guyatt GH J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 Dec; 57(12):1232-6. PubMed ID: 15617948 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Impact of Selection Bias on Treatment Effect Size Estimates in Randomized Trials of Oral Health Interventions: A Meta-epidemiological Study. Saltaji H; Armijo-Olivo S; Cummings GG; Amin M; da Costa BR; Flores-Mir C J Dent Res; 2018 Jan; 97(1):5-13. PubMed ID: 28813182 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Using scratch card technology for random allocation concealment in a clinical trial with a crossover design. Beksinska ME; Joanis C; Smit JA; Pienaar J; Piaggio G Clin Trials; 2013 Feb; 10(1):125-30. PubMed ID: 23188890 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Empirical Evidence of Study Design Biases in Randomized Trials: Systematic Review of Meta-Epidemiological Studies. Page MJ; Higgins JP; Clayton G; Sterne JA; Hróbjartsson A; Savović J PLoS One; 2016; 11(7):e0159267. PubMed ID: 27398997 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Moher D; Pham B; Jones A; Cook DJ; Jadad AR; Moher M; Tugwell P; Klassen TP Lancet; 1998 Aug; 352(9128):609-13. PubMed ID: 9746022 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Should meta-analyses of interventions include observational studies in addition to randomized controlled trials? A critical examination of underlying principles. Shrier I; Boivin JF; Steele RJ; Platt RW; Furlan A; Kakuma R; Brophy J; Rossignol M Am J Epidemiol; 2007 Nov; 166(10):1203-9. PubMed ID: 17712019 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Systematic reviewers neglect bias that results from trials stopped early for benefit. Bassler D; Ferreira-Gonzalez I; Briel M; Cook DJ; Devereaux PJ; Heels-Ansdell D; Kirpalani H; Meade MO; Montori VM; Rozenberg A; Schünemann HJ; Guyatt GH J Clin Epidemiol; 2007 Sep; 60(9):869-73. PubMed ID: 17689802 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Trial sequential analyses of meta-analyses of complications in laparoscopic vs. small-incision cholecystectomy: more randomized patients are needed. Keus F; Wetterslev J; Gluud C; Gooszen HG; van Laarhoven CJ J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Mar; 63(3):246-56. PubMed ID: 20004553 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessment of risk of bias in randomized clinical trials in surgery. Gurusamy KS; Gluud C; Nikolova D; Davidson BR Br J Surg; 2009 Apr; 96(4):342-9. PubMed ID: 19283747 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]