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.
6. 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]
7. Assessing the validity of clinical trials. Akobeng AK J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr; 2008 Sep; 47(3):277-82. PubMed ID: 18728521 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Methodological issues in infertility research. Daya S Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 2006 Dec; 20(6):779-97. PubMed ID: 17118261 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Evidence-based clinical practice]. Gluud C Zhongguo Yi Xue Ke Xue Yuan Xue Bao; 2002 Dec; 24(6):541-7. PubMed ID: 12905675 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Expanding the evidence base in transplantation: the complementary roles of randomized controlled trials and outcomes research. Takemoto SK; Arns W; Bunnapradist S; Garrison LP; Guirado L; Kalo Z; Oniscu G; Opelz G; Scolari MP; Stefoni S; Yaqoob M; Brennan DC Transplantation; 2008 Jul; 86(1):18-25. PubMed ID: 18622271 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. On the causal structure of information bias and confounding bias in randomized trials. Shahar E; Shahar DJ J Eval Clin Pract; 2009 Dec; 15(6):1214-6. PubMed ID: 20367730 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evidence-based medicine must be .. La Caze A J Med Philos; 2009 Oct; 34(5):509-27. PubMed ID: 19690324 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Re: The design versus the analysis of observational studies for causal effects: parallels with the design of randomized trials. Shrier I Stat Med; 2008 Jun; 27(14):2740-1; author reply 2741-2. PubMed ID: 18069729 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Detecting and adjusting for small-study effects in meta-analysis. Rücker G; Carpenter JR; Schwarzer G Biom J; 2011 Mar; 53(2):351-68. PubMed ID: 21374698 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: the struggle between external and internal validity. Godwin M; Ruhland L; Casson I; MacDonald S; Delva D; Birtwhistle R; Lam M; Seguin R BMC Med Res Methodol; 2003 Dec; 3():28. PubMed ID: 14690550 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Interpretation of tests of heterogeneity and bias in meta-analysis. Ioannidis JP J Eval Clin Pract; 2008 Oct; 14(5):951-7. PubMed ID: 19018930 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Toward non-parametric and clinically meaningful moderators and mediators. Kraemer HC Stat Med; 2008 May; 27(10):1679-92. PubMed ID: 18008395 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Pitfalls in the interpretation of randomised controlled trials]. Ueda S Masui; 2011 Mar; 60(3):277-84. PubMed ID: 21485096 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]