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 *

214 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25773753)

  • 1. On the criteria used for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing adverse effects.
    Bonovas S; Lytras T; Nikolopoulos G
    Eur J Epidemiol; 2015 Mar; 30(3):249-50. PubMed ID: 25773753
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Errors in the conduct of systematic reviews of pharmacological interventions for irritable bowel syndrome.
    Ford AC; Guyatt GH; Talley NJ; Moayyedi P
    Am J Gastroenterol; 2010 Feb; 105(2):280-8. PubMed ID: 19920807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Important outcome predictors showed greater baseline heterogeneity than age in two systematic reviews.
    Clark L; Fairhurst C; Cook E; Torgerson DJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Feb; 68(2):175-81. PubMed ID: 25457029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A new risk of bias checklist applicable to randomized trials, observational studies, and systematic reviews was developed and validated to be used for systematic reviews focusing on drug adverse events.
    Faillie JL; Ferrer P; Gouverneur A; Driot D; Berkemeyer S; Vidal X; Martínez-Zapata MJ; Huerta C; Castells X; Rottenkolber M; Schmiedl S; Sabaté M; Ballarín E; Ibáñez L
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Jun; 86():168-175. PubMed ID: 28487158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis.
    Tierney JF; Stewart LA
    Int J Epidemiol; 2005 Feb; 34(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 15561753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Methodologic issues in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
    Montori VM; Swiontkowski MF; Cook DJ
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2003 Aug; (413):43-54. PubMed ID: 12897595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Deconstructing evidence in orthodontics: making sense of systematic reviews, randomized clinical trials, and meta-analyses.
    Rinchuse DJ; Rinchuse DJ; Kandasamy S; Ackerman MB
    World J Orthod; 2008; 9(2):167-76. PubMed ID: 18575311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Randomized Trials, Meta-Analyses, and Systematic Reviews: Using Examples from Rheumatology.
    Pope JE; Hazlewood GS
    Rheum Dis Clin North Am; 2018 May; 44(2):295-305. PubMed ID: 29622296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Selective reporting bias of harm outcomes within studies: findings from a cohort of systematic reviews.
    Saini P; Loke YK; Gamble C; Altman DG; Williamson PR; Kirkham JJ
    BMJ; 2014 Nov; 349():g6501. PubMed ID: 25416499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A methodological review of recent meta-analyses has found significant heterogeneity in age between randomized groups.
    Clark L; Fairhurst C; Hewitt CE; Birks Y; Brabyn S; Cockayne S; Rodgers S; Hicks K; Hodgson R; Littlewood E; Torgerson DJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2014 Sep; 67(9):1016-24. PubMed ID: 24909873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. PRISMAtic reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
    Jüni P; Egger M
    Lancet; 2009 Oct; 374(9697):1221-3. PubMed ID: 19819375
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Sources of evidence for systematic reviews of interventions in diabetes.
    Royle PL; Bain L; Waugh NR
    Diabet Med; 2005 Oct; 22(10):1386-93. PubMed ID: 16176201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. A meta-epidemiological study to examine the association between bias and treatment effects in neonatal trials.
    Bialy L; Vandermeer B; Lacaze-Masmonteil T; Dryden DM; Hartling L
    Evid Based Child Health; 2014 Dec; 9(4):1052-9. PubMed ID: 25504975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. How to read and understand and use systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
    Leucht S; Kissling W; Davis JM
    Acta Psychiatr Scand; 2009 Jun; 119(6):443-50. PubMed ID: 19469725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An analysis of systematic reviews undertaken on standard advanced wound dressings in the last 10 years.
    Horkan L; Stansfield G; Miller M
    J Wound Care; 2009 Jul; 18(7):298-304. PubMed ID: 19827483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Narrowing the focus and broadening horizons: complementary roles for systematic and nonsystematic reviews.
    Cook DA
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2008 Nov; 13(4):391-5. PubMed ID: 18850297
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Conducting systematic reviews of intervention questions III: Synthesizing data from intervention studies using meta-analysis.
    O'Connor AM; Sargeant JM; Wang C
    Zoonoses Public Health; 2014 Jun; 61 Suppl 1():52-63. PubMed ID: 24905996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Systematic reviews.
    Connelly LM
    Medsurg Nurs; 2009; 18(3):181-2. PubMed ID: 19591365
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.