911 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24690082)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. A systematic review of clinical outcomes in surgical treatment of adult isthmic spondylolisthesis.
Noorian S; Sorensen K; Cho W
Spine J; 2018 Aug; 18(8):1441-1454. PubMed ID: 29746966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Comparing machine and human reviewers to evaluate the risk of bias in randomized controlled trials.
Armijo-Olivo S; Craig R; Campbell S
Res Synth Methods; 2020 May; 11(3):484-493. PubMed ID: 32065732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Are reviewers suggested by authors as good as those chosen by editors? Results of a rater-blinded, retrospective study.
Wager E; Parkin EC; Tamber PS
BMC Med; 2006 May; 4():13. PubMed ID: 16734897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Soll RF; Ovelman C; McGuire W
Early Hum Dev; 2020 Nov; 150():105191. PubMed ID: 33036834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Improving the utility of multisource feedback for medical consultants in a tertiary hospital: a study of the psychometric properties of a survey tool.
Corbett H; Pearson K; Karimi L; Lim WK
Aust Health Rev; 2019 Jan; 43(6):717-723. PubMed ID: 30463660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Quality of Reporting and Study Design of CKD Cohort Studies Assessing Mortality in the Elderly Before and After STROBE: A Systematic Review.
Rao A; Brück K; Methven S; Evans R; Stel VS; Jager KJ; Hooft L; Ben-Shlomo Y; Caskey F
PLoS One; 2016; 11(5):e0155078. PubMed ID: 27168187
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Quality Assessment of Studies Published in Open Access and Subscription Journals: Results of a Systematic Evaluation.
Pastorino R; Milovanovic S; Stojanovic J; Efremov L; Amore R; Boccia S
PLoS One; 2016; 11(5):e0154217. PubMed ID: 27167982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Case study in major quotation errors: a critical commentary on the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
Stang A; Jonas S; Poole C
Eur J Epidemiol; 2018 Nov; 33(11):1025-1031. PubMed ID: 30259221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
