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 *

185 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27156344)

  • 1. A suggestion for quality assessment in systematic reviews of observational studies in nutritional epidemiology.
    Bae JM
    Epidemiol Health; 2016; 38():e2016014. PubMed ID: 27156344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of methods of extracting information for meta-analysis of observational studies in nutritional epidemiology.
    Bae JM
    Epidemiol Health; 2016; 38():e2016003. PubMed ID: 26797219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review.
    Zeng X; Zhang Y; Kwong JS; Zhang C; Li S; Sun F; Niu Y; Du L
    J Evid Based Med; 2015 Feb; 8(1):2-10. PubMed ID: 25594108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Methodological quality is underrated in systematic reviews and meta-analyses in health psychology.
    Oliveras I; Losilla JM; Vives J
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Jun; 86():59-70. PubMed ID: 28499846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Systematic review and network meta-analysis in health technology assessment.
    Chaiyakunapruk N; Saokaew S; Sruamsiri R; Dilokthornsakul P
    J Med Assoc Thai; 2014 May; 97 Suppl 5():S33-42. PubMed ID: 24964697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Response to letter to the editor from Dr Rahman Shiri: The challenging topic of suicide across occupational groups.
    Niedhammer I; Milner A; Witt K; Klingelschmidt J; Khireddine-Medouni I; Alexopoulos EC; Toivanen S; Chastang JF; LaMontagne AD
    Scand J Work Environ Health; 2018 Jan; 44(1):108-110. PubMed ID: 29218357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Moose on the loose: checklist for meta-analyses of observational studies.
    van Zuuren EJ; Fedorowicz Z
    Br J Dermatol; 2016 Nov; 175(5):853-854. PubMed ID: 27790686
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Cancer and central nervous system disorders: protocol for an umbrella review of systematic reviews and updated meta-analyses of observational studies.
    Catalá-López F; Hutton B; Driver JA; Page MJ; Ridao M; Valderas JM; Alonso-Arroyo A; Forés-Martos J; Martínez S; Gènova-Maleras R; Macías-Saint-Gerons D; Crespo-Facorro B; Vieta E; Valencia A; Tabarés-Seisdedos R
    Syst Rev; 2017 Apr; 6(1):69. PubMed ID: 28376926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Three risk of bias tools lead to opposite conclusions in observational research synthesis.
    Losilla JM; Oliveras I; Marin-Garcia JA; Vives J
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Sep; 101():61-72. PubMed ID: 29864541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Fixed or random effects meta-analysis? Common methodological issues in systematic reviews of effectiveness.
    Tufanaru C; Munn Z; Stephenson M; Aromataris E
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2015 Sep; 13(3):196-207. PubMed ID: 26355603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Quality appraisal in systematic reviews of public health interventions: an empirical study on the impact of choice of tool on meta-analysis.
    Voss PH; Rehfuess EA
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 2013 Jan; 67(1):98-104. PubMed ID: 22851579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. COSMOS-E: Guidance on conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies of etiology.
    Dekkers OM; Vandenbroucke JP; Cevallos M; Renehan AG; Altman DG; Egger M
    PLoS Med; 2019 Feb; 16(2):e1002742. PubMed ID: 30789892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. The GRACE checklist for rating the quality of observational studies of comparative effectiveness: a tale of hope and caution.
    Dreyer NA; Velentgas P; Westrich K; Dubois R
    J Manag Care Spec Pharm; 2014 Mar; 20(3):301-8. PubMed ID: 24564810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Evaluation of methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses: AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool for the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews)].
    Coenen M; Schuetz GM; Dewey M
    Rofo; 2013 Sep; 184(10):937-40. PubMed ID: 23999778
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.