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 *

120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21593102)

  • 1. Making GRADE accessible: a proposal for graphic display of evidence quality assessments.
    Khan KS; Borowiack E; Roos C; Kowalska M; Zapalska A; Mol BW; Mignini L; Meads C; Walczak J;
    Evid Based Med; 2011 Jun; 16(3):65-9. PubMed ID: 21593102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Graphical displays for effective reporting of evidence quality tables in research syntheses.
    Mignini L; Champaneria R; Mishanina E; Khan KS;
    Reprod Health; 2016 Mar; 13():21. PubMed ID: 26957125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assimilating evidence quality at a glance using graphic display: research synthesis on labor induction.
    Fox CE; Tirlapur SA; Gülmezoglu AM; Souza JP; Khan KS;
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2012 Aug; 91(8):885-92. PubMed ID: 22583063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Eur J Health Econ; 2008 Nov; 9 Suppl 1():5-29. PubMed ID: 18987905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany].
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2008 Dec; 133 Suppl 7():S225-46. PubMed ID: 19034813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. From randomized controlled trials to evidence grading schemes: current state of evidence-based practice in social sciences.
    Boruch R; Rui N
    J Evid Based Med; 2008 Nov; 1(1):41-9. PubMed ID: 21348975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Hierarchy of evidence and appraisal of limitations (HEAL) grading system.
    Gugiu PC
    Eval Program Plann; 2015 Feb; 48():149-59. PubMed ID: 25245705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An introduction to evidence-based practice for hand surgeons and therapists.
    Szabo RM; MacDermid JC
    Hand Clin; 2009 Feb; 25(1):1-14, v. PubMed ID: 19232911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: Part 2 of 3. The GRADE approach to grading quality of evidence about diagnostic tests and strategies.
    Brozek JL; Akl EA; Jaeschke R; Lang DM; Bossuyt P; Glasziou P; Helfand M; Ueffing E; Alonso-Coello P; Meerpohl J; Phillips B; Horvath AR; Bousquet J; Guyatt GH; Schünemann HJ;
    Allergy; 2009 Aug; 64(8):1109-16. PubMed ID: 19489757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence--study limitations (risk of bias).
    Guyatt GH; Oxman AD; Vist G; Kunz R; Brozek J; Alonso-Coello P; Montori V; Akl EA; Djulbegovic B; Falck-Ytter Y; Norris SL; Williams JW; Atkins D; Meerpohl J; Schünemann HJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Apr; 64(4):407-15. PubMed ID: 21247734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations in clinical dentistry: a critical review of 2 prominent approaches.
    Faggion CM
    J Evid Based Dent Pract; 2010 Jun; 10(2):78-85. PubMed ID: 20466314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The pits and falls of graphical presentation.
    Sperandei S
    Biochem Med (Zagreb); 2014; 24(3):311-20. PubMed ID: 25351349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Critical appraisal of research evidence for its validity and usefulness.
    MacDermid JC; Walton DM; Law M
    Hand Clin; 2009 Feb; 25(1):29-42, v. PubMed ID: 19232913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. SQUIRE Guidelines for reporting improvement studies in healthcare: implications for nursing publications.
    Oermann MH
    J Nurs Care Qual; 2009; 24(2):91-5. PubMed ID: 19287244
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Understanding statistical significance.
    Hayat MJ
    Nurs Res; 2010; 59(3):219-23. PubMed ID: 20445438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Systematic mixed-methods reviews are not ready to be assessed with the available tools.
    Bouchard K; Dubuisson W; Simard J; Dorval M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Aug; 64(8):926-8. PubMed ID: 21474281
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. [Developing quality indicators: background, methods and problems].
    Kötter T; Schaefer F; Blozik E; Scherer M
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2011; 105(1):7-12. PubMed ID: 21382599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Best-practice guidelines for physical activity at child care.
    McWilliams C; Ball SC; Benjamin SE; Hales D; Vaughn A; Ward DS
    Pediatrics; 2009 Dec; 124(6):1650-9. PubMed ID: 19917582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The EQUATOR Network and the PRISMA Statement for the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
    Harms M
    Physiotherapy; 2009 Dec; 95(4):237-40. PubMed ID: 19892087
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.