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.
242 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24559028)
1. Quality standards for real-world research. Focus on observational database studies of comparative effectiveness. Roche N; Reddel H; Martin R; Brusselle G; Papi A; Thomas M; Postma D; Thomas V; Rand C; Chisholm A; Price D; Ann Am Thorac Soc; 2014 Feb; 11 Suppl 2():S99-104. PubMed ID: 24559028 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Prospective observational studies to assess comparative effectiveness: the ISPOR good research practices task force report. Berger ML; Dreyer N; Anderson F; Towse A; Sedrakyan A; Normand SL Value Health; 2012; 15(2):217-30. PubMed ID: 22433752 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Observational study designs for comparative effectiveness research: an alternative approach to close evidence gaps in head-and-neck cancer. Goulart BH; Ramsey SD; Parvathaneni U Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2014 Jan; 88(1):106-14. PubMed ID: 24331656 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: approaches to mitigate bias and confounding in the design of nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report--Part II. Cox E; Martin BC; Van Staa T; Garbe E; Siebert U; Johnson ML Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1053-61. PubMed ID: 19744292 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. "Lies, damned lies ..." and observational studies in comparative effectiveness research. Albert RK Am J Respir Crit Care Med; 2013 Jun; 187(11):1173-7. PubMed ID: 23725614 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The GRACE Checklist: A Validated Assessment Tool for High Quality Observational Studies of Comparative Effectiveness. Dreyer NA; Bryant A; Velentgas P J Manag Care Spec Pharm; 2016 Oct; 22(10):1107-13. PubMed ID: 27668559 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: defining, reporting and interpreting nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report--Part I. Berger ML; Mamdani M; Atkins D; Johnson ML Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1044-52. PubMed ID: 19793072 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Leveraging observational registries to inform comparative effectiveness research. Shah BR; Drozda J; Peterson ED Am Heart J; 2010 Jul; 160(1):8-15. PubMed ID: 20598966 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Association between pacifier use and breast-feeding, sudden infant death syndrome, infection and dental malocclusion. Callaghan A; Kendall G; Lock C; Mahony A; Payne J; Verrier L Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2005 Jul; 3(6):147-67. PubMed ID: 21631747 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The utility of observational studies in clinical decision making: lessons learned from statin trials. Foody JM; Mendys PM; Liu LZ; Simpson RJ Postgrad Med; 2010 May; 122(3):222-9. PubMed ID: 20463433 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Approaches to answering critical CER questions. Kinnier CV; Chung JW; Bilimoria KY Cancer Treat Res; 2015; 164():1-14. PubMed ID: 25677015 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Pre-study feasibility and identifying sensitivity analyses for protocol pre-specification in comparative effectiveness research. Girman CJ; Faries D; Ryan P; Rotelli M; Belger M; Binkowitz B; O'Neill R; J Comp Eff Res; 2014 May; 3(3):259-70. PubMed ID: 24969153 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of the literature: evidence assessment tools for clinicians. Prato GP; Pagliaro U; Buti J; Rotundo R; Newman MG J Evid Based Dent Pract; 2013 Dec; 13(4):130-41. PubMed ID: 24237732 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect? Allen D; Rixson L Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2008 Mar; 6(1):78-110. PubMed ID: 21631815 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The "e" in cost-effectiveness analyses. A case study of omalizumab efficacy and effectiveness for cost-effectiveness analysis evidence. Campbell JD; McQueen RB; Briggs A Ann Am Thorac Soc; 2014 Feb; 11 Suppl 2():S105-11. PubMed ID: 24559022 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparative effectiveness research in localized prostate cancer treatment. Hoffman RM; Penson DF; Zietman AL; Barry MJ J Comp Eff Res; 2013 Nov; 2(6):583-93. PubMed ID: 24236797 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The role for pragmatic randomized controlled trials (pRCTs) in comparative effectiveness research. Chalkidou K; Tunis S; Whicher D; Fowler R; Zwarenstein M Clin Trials; 2012 Aug; 9(4):436-46. PubMed ID: 22752634 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparative effectiveness research: welcome to the real world. Klein HG Transfusion; 2012 Jun; 52(6):1162-4. PubMed ID: 22686529 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]