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 *

333 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23683848)

  • 1. Testing the Newcastle Ottawa Scale showed low reliability between individual reviewers.
    Hartling L; Milne A; Hamm MP; Vandermeer B; Ansari M; Tsertsvadze A; Dryden DM
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 Sep; 66(9):982-93. PubMed ID: 23683848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Inter-rater reliability of AMSTAR is dependent on the pair of reviewers.
    Pieper D; Jacobs A; Weikert B; Fishta A; Wegewitz U
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Jul; 17(1):98. PubMed ID: 28693497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale: comparing reviewers' to authors' assessments.
    Lo CK; Mertz D; Loeb M
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2014 Apr; 14():45. PubMed ID: 24690082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Testing the risk of bias tool showed low reliability between individual reviewers and across consensus assessments of reviewer pairs.
    Hartling L; Hamm MP; Milne A; Vandermeer B; Santaguida PL; Ansari M; Tsertsvadze A; Hempel S; Shekelle P; Dryden DM
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 Sep; 66(9):973-81. PubMed ID: 22981249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Reliability and validity of three quality rating instruments for systematic reviews of observational studies.
    Hootman JM; Driban JB; Sitler MR; Harris KP; Cattano NM
    Res Synth Methods; 2011 Jun; 2(2):110-8. PubMed ID: 26061679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Interrater reliability in assessing quality of diagnostic accuracy studies using the QUADAS tool. A preliminary assessment.
    Hollingworth W; Medina LS; Lenkinski RE; Shibata DK; Bernal B; Zurakowski D; Comstock B; Jarvik JG
    Acad Radiol; 2006 Jul; 13(7):803-10. PubMed ID: 16777553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Inter-rater and test-retest reliability of quality assessments by novice student raters using the Jadad and Newcastle-Ottawa Scales.
    Oremus M; Oremus C; Hall GB; McKinnon MC;
    BMJ Open; 2012; 2(4):. PubMed ID: 22855629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The ROBINS-I and the NOS had similar reliability but differed in applicability: A random sampling observational studies of systematic reviews/meta-analysis.
    Zhang Y; Huang L; Wang D; Ren P; Hong Q; Kang D
    J Evid Based Med; 2021 May; 14(2):112-122. PubMed ID: 34002466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Poor reliability between Cochrane reviewers and blinded external reviewers when applying the Cochrane risk of bias tool in physical therapy trials.
    Armijo-Olivo S; Ospina M; da Costa BR; Egger M; Saltaji H; Fuentes J; Ha C; Cummings GG
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(5):e96920. PubMed ID: 24824199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews of Non-Randomized Studies of Adverse Cardiovascular Effects of Thiazolidinediones and Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors: Application of a New Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.
    Bilandzic A; Fitzpatrick T; Rosella L; Henry D
    PLoS Med; 2016 Apr; 13(4):e1001987. PubMed ID: 27046153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Inter-rater reliability and validity of risk of bias instrument for non-randomized studies of exposures: a study protocol.
    Jeyaraman MM; Al-Yousif N; Robson RC; Copstein L; Balijepalli C; Hofer K; Fazeli MS; Ansari MT; Tricco AC; Rabbani R; Abou-Setta AM
    Syst Rev; 2020 Feb; 9(1):32. PubMed ID: 32051035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reliability of Observational Assessment Methods for Outcome-based Assessment of Surgical Skill: Systematic Review and Meta-analyses.
    Groenier M; Brummer L; Bunting BP; Gallagher AG
    J Surg Educ; 2020; 77(1):189-201. PubMed ID: 31444148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.
    Shea BJ; Hamel C; Wells GA; Bouter LM; Kristjansson E; Grimshaw J; Henry DA; Boers M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Oct; 62(10):1013-20. PubMed ID: 19230606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. No clear choice between Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies to assess methodological quality in cross-sectional studies of health-related quality of life and breast cancer.
    Moskalewicz A; Oremus M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Apr; 120():94-103. PubMed ID: 31866469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reproducibility of the STARD checklist: an instrument to assess the quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies.
    Smidt N; Rutjes AW; van der Windt DA; Ostelo RW; Bossuyt PM; Reitsma JB; Bouter LM; de Vet HC
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2006 Mar; 6():12. PubMed ID: 16539705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Evidence Project risk of bias tool: assessing study rigor for both randomized and non-randomized intervention studies.
    Kennedy CE; Fonner VA; Armstrong KA; Denison JA; Yeh PT; O'Reilly KR; Sweat MD
    Syst Rev; 2019 Jan; 8(1):3. PubMed ID: 30606262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity of ROBINS-I: protocol for a cross-sectional study.
    Jeyaraman MM; Rabbani R; Al-Yousif N; Robson RC; Copstein L; Xia J; Pollock M; Mansour S; Ansari MT; Tricco AC; Abou-Setta AM
    Syst Rev; 2020 Jan; 9(1):12. PubMed ID: 31931871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Is inter-rater reliability of Global Trigger Tool results altered when members of the review team are replaced?
    Mevik K; Griffin FA; Hansen TE; Deilkås E; Vonen B
    Int J Qual Health Care; 2016 Sep; 28(4):492-6. PubMed ID: 27283442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 17.