359 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26537988)
1. Network meta-analysis incorporating randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative cohort studies for assessing the safety and effectiveness of medical treatments: challenges and opportunities.
Cameron C; Fireman B; Hutton B; Clifford T; Coyle D; Wells G; Dormuth CR; Platt R; Toh S
Syst Rev; 2015 Nov; 4():147. PubMed ID: 26537988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Reporting of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials with a focus on drug safety: an empirical assessment.
Hammad TA; Neyarapally GA; Pinheiro SP; Iyasu S; Rochester G; Dal Pan G
Clin Trials; 2013; 10(3):389-97. PubMed ID: 23508987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
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. Ethical pitfalls in neonatal comparative effectiveness trials.
Modi N
Neonatology; 2014; 105(4):350-1. PubMed ID: 24931328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Meta-analysis in medical research: potentials and limitations.
Zwahlen M; Renehan A; Egger M
Urol Oncol; 2008; 26(3):320-9. PubMed ID: 18452828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessing the reporting and scientific quality of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials of treatments for anxiety disorders.
Bereza BG; Machado M; Einarson TR
Ann Pharmacother; 2008 Oct; 42(10):1402-9. PubMed ID: 18728102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Active-comparator design and new-user design in observational studies.
Yoshida K; Solomon DH; Kim SC
Nat Rev Rheumatol; 2015 Jul; 11(7):437-41. PubMed ID: 25800216
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Comparative effectiveness of antibiotics for uncomplicated urinary tract infections: network meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Knottnerus BJ; Grigoryan L; Geerlings SE; Moll van Charante EP; Verheij TJ; Kessels AG; ter Riet G
Fam Pract; 2012 Dec; 29(6):659-70. PubMed ID: 22516128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Combining randomized and non-randomized evidence in network meta-analysis.
Efthimiou O; Mavridis D; Debray TP; Samara M; Belger M; Siontis GC; Leucht S; Salanti G;
Stat Med; 2017 Apr; 36(8):1210-1226. PubMed ID: 28083901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Should meta-analyses of interventions include observational studies in addition to randomized controlled trials? A critical examination of underlying principles.
Shrier I; Boivin JF; Steele RJ; Platt RW; Furlan A; Kakuma R; Brophy J; Rossignol M
Am J Epidemiol; 2007 Nov; 166(10):1203-9. PubMed ID: 17712019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Network meta-analyses: Interest and limits in oncology].
Ribassin-Majed L; Pignon JP; Michiels S; Blanchard P
Bull Cancer; 2016 Mar; 103(3):289-93. PubMed ID: 26917469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Using routine data to complement and enhance the results of randomised controlled trials.
Lewsey JD; Leyland AH; Murray GD; Boddy FA
Health Technol Assess; 2000; 4(22):1-55. PubMed ID: 11074392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. "A Bayesian sensitivity analysis to evaluate the impact of unmeasured confounding with external data: a real world comparative effectiveness study in osteoporosis".
Zhang X; Faries DE; Boytsov N; Stamey JD; Seaman JW
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2016 Sep; 25(9):982-92. PubMed ID: 27396534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Secondary use of randomized controlled trials to evaluate drug safety: a review of methodological considerations.
Hammad TA; Pinheiro SP; Neyarapally GA
Clin Trials; 2011 Oct; 8(5):559-70. PubMed ID: 21878445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Empirical assessment suggests that existing evidence could be used more fully in designing randomized controlled trials.
Goudie AC; Sutton AJ; Jones DR; Donald A
J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Sep; 63(9):983-91. PubMed ID: 20573483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Single-center trials show larger treatment effects than multicenter trials: evidence from a meta-epidemiologic study.
Dechartres A; Boutron I; Trinquart L; Charles P; Ravaud P
Ann Intern Med; 2011 Jul; 155(1):39-51. PubMed ID: 21727292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Benchmarking Controlled Trial--a novel concept covering all observational effectiveness studies.
Malmivaara A
Ann Med; 2015 Jun; 47(4):332-40. PubMed ID: 25965700
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
