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.
63. Messages for Clinicians: Moderators and Mediators of Treatment Outcome in Randomized Clinical Trials. Kraemer HC Am J Psychiatry; 2016 Jul; 173(7):672-9. PubMed ID: 26988629 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
64. Use of self-controlled designs in pharmacoepidemiology. Hallas J; Pottegård A J Intern Med; 2014 Jun; 275(6):581-9. PubMed ID: 24635348 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
65. Assessing the evidence from neonatal nutrition research. Szajewska H; Koletzko B; Mimouni FB; Uauy R World Rev Nutr Diet; 2014; 110():27-48. PubMed ID: 24751620 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
66. Statistical principles: myths or facts? Sylvester R Onkologie; 2003 Dec; 26(6):520-1. PubMed ID: 14709923 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
67. [Evidence-based medicine. Input of epidemiologic studies]. Reginster JY; Betz R Rev Med Liege; 2000 Apr; 55(4):211-5. PubMed ID: 10909302 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
69. The end of biomedical journals: there is madness in their methods. Aickin M J Altern Complement Med; 2005 Oct; 11(5):755-7. PubMed ID: 16296895 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
70. Use of Mendelian randomisation to assess potential benefit of clinical intervention. Burgess S; Butterworth A; Malarstig A; Thompson SG BMJ; 2012 Nov; 345():e7325. PubMed ID: 23131671 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
72. Assessing the effects of bias on the magnitude of outcomes in clinical studies: lessons for the research community? Hughes FJ J Clin Periodontol; 2008 Sep; 35(9):773-4. PubMed ID: 18840152 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
73. Large-scale randomized evidence: large, simple trials and overviews of trials. Peto R; Collins R; Gray R J Clin Epidemiol; 1995 Jan; 48(1):23-40. PubMed ID: 7853045 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
74. Lessons in biostatistics: inferences and conjectures about average and conditional treatment effects in randomized trials and observational studies. Bottai M J Intern Med; 2014 Sep; 276(3):229-37. PubMed ID: 25040872 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
75. Pooling research results: benefits and limitations of meta-analysis. Ioannidis JP; Lau J Jt Comm J Qual Improv; 1999 Sep; 25(9):462-9. PubMed ID: 10481815 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
76. [Clinical evidence from indirect and mixed-treatment comparisons: some practical considerations]. Catalá-López F; Tobías A Farm Hosp; 2012; 36(6):556-7. PubMed ID: 23461456 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
77. Power dressing and meta-analysis: incorporating power analysis into meta-analysis. Muncer S; Taylor S; Craigie M J Adv Nurs; 2002 May; 38(3):274-80. PubMed ID: 11972663 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
78. Evidence-based medicine-When observational studies are better than randomized controlled trials. Bosdriesz JR; Stel VS; van Diepen M; Meuleman Y; Dekker FW; Zoccali C; Jager KJ Nephrology (Carlton); 2020 Oct; 25(10):737-743. PubMed ID: 32542836 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
79. Importance of meta-analysis and practical obstacles in oncological and epidemiological studies: statistics very close but also far! Tanriverdi O; Yeniceri N Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2015; 16(3):1303-6. PubMed ID: 25735371 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
80. Choice of test for comparing two groups, with particular application to skewed outcomes. White IR; Thompson SG Stat Med; 2003 Apr; 22(8):1205-15. PubMed ID: 12687651 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]