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 *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26671213)

  • 1. Systematic Differences between Cochrane and Non-Cochrane Meta-Analyses on the Same Topic: A Matched Pair Analysis.
    Useem J; Brennan A; LaValley M; Vickery M; Ameli O; Reinen N; Gill CJ
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(12):e0144980. PubMed ID: 26671213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Discrepancies in meta-analyses answering the same clinical question were hard to explain: a meta-epidemiological study.
    Hacke C; Nunan D
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Mar; 119():47-56. PubMed ID: 31783099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Reporting 'number needed to treat' in meta-analyses: a cross-sectional study.
    Naing C; Aung K; Mak JW
    J Evid Based Med; 2012 Nov; 5(4):232-7. PubMed ID: 23557504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effectiveness of interventions that assist caregivers to support people with dementia living in the community: a systematic review.
    Parker D; Mills S; Abbey J
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2008 Jun; 6(2):137-72. PubMed ID: 21631819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals.
    Jadad AR; Cook DJ; Jones A; Klassen TP; Tugwell P; Moher M; Moher D
    JAMA; 1998 Jul; 280(3):278-80. PubMed ID: 9676681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evidence based evaluation of immuno-coagulatory interventions in critical care.
    Afshari A
    Dan Med Bull; 2011 Sep; 58(9):B4316. PubMed ID: 21893014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of reporting bias on meta-analyses of drug trials: reanalysis of meta-analyses.
    Hart B; Lundh A; Bero L
    BMJ; 2012 Jan; 344():d7202. PubMed ID: 22214754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in assisted reproductive technologies.
    Windsor B; Popovich I; Jordan V; Showell M; Shea B; Farquhar C
    Hum Reprod; 2012 Dec; 27(12):3460-6. PubMed ID: 23034152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: systematic review.
    Jørgensen AW; Hilden J; Gøtzsche PC
    BMJ; 2006 Oct; 333(7572):782. PubMed ID: 17028106
    [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. Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: effects on growth.
    Zhang L; Prietsch SO; Ducharme FM
    Evid Based Child Health; 2014 Dec; 9(4):829-930. PubMed ID: 25504972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Meta-analysis: Problems with Russian Publications.
    Verbitskaya EV
    Int J Risk Saf Med; 2015; 27 Suppl 1():S89-90. PubMed ID: 26639728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Can we rely on the best trial? A comparison of individual trials and systematic reviews.
    Glasziou PP; Shepperd S; Brassey J
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2010 Mar; 10():23. PubMed ID: 20298582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The quality of reports of critical care meta-analyses in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: an independent appraisal.
    Delaney A; Bagshaw SM; Ferland A; Laupland K; Manns B; Doig C
    Crit Care Med; 2007 Feb; 35(2):589-94. PubMed ID: 17205029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Non-Cochrane vs. Cochrane reviews were twice as likely to have positive conclusion statements: cross-sectional study.
    Tricco AC; Tetzlaff J; Pham B; Brehaut J; Moher D
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Apr; 62(4):380-386.e1. PubMed ID: 19128940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Methodological quality of meta-analyses: matched-pairs comparison over time and between industry-sponsored and academic-sponsored reports.
    Lane PW; Higgins JP; Anagnostelis B; Anzures-Cabrera J; Baker NF; Cappelleri JC; Haughie S; Hollis S; Lewis SC; Moneuse P; Whitehead A
    Res Synth Methods; 2013 Dec; 4(4):342-50. PubMed ID: 26053947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Statistical multiplicity in systematic reviews of anaesthesia interventions: a quantification and comparison between Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews.
    Imberger G; Vejlby AD; Hansen SB; Møller AM; Wetterslev J
    PLoS One; 2011; 6(12):e28422. PubMed ID: 22164288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Impact of heterogeneity and effect size on the estimation of the optimal information size: analysis of recently published meta-analyses.
    Garcia-Alamino JM; Bankhead C; Heneghan C; Pidduck N; Perera R
    BMJ Open; 2017 Nov; 7(11):e015888. PubMed ID: 29122784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.