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 *

1022 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]
    of 52.