164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27773984)
1. Adaptive designs for comparative effectiveness research trials.
Kairalla JA; Coffey CS; Thomann MA; Shorr RI; Muller KE
Clin Res Regul Aff; 2015; 32(1):36-44. PubMed ID: 27773984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Innovative designs of point-of-care comparative effectiveness trials.
Shih MC; Turakhia M; Lai TL
Contemp Clin Trials; 2015 Nov; 45(Pt A):61-8. PubMed ID: 26099528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Expected Value of Sample Information to Guide the Design of Group Sequential Clinical Trials.
Flight L; Julious S; Brennan A; Todd S
Med Decis Making; 2022 May; 42(4):461-473. PubMed ID: 34859693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cross-sector surveys assessing perceptions of key stakeholders towards barriers, concerns and facilitators to the appropriate use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials.
Dimairo M; Julious SA; Todd S; Nicholl JP; Boote J
Trials; 2015 Dec; 16():585. PubMed ID: 26700741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Point-of-Care Clinical Trials in Sports Medicine Research: Identifying Effective Treatment Interventions Through Comparative Effectiveness Research.
Lam KC; Bacon CEW; Sauers EL; Bay RC
J Athl Train; 2020 Mar; 55(3):217-228. PubMed ID: 31618071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Do Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages for comparative effectiveness research? Protocol for the RE-ADAPT study.
Connor JT; Luce BR; Broglio KR; Ishak KJ; Mullins CD; Vanness DJ; Fleurence R; Saunders E; Davis BR
Clin Trials; 2013 Oct; 10(5):807-27. PubMed ID: 23983160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparative effectiveness research (CER): a summary of AHRQ's CER on therapies for rheumatoid arthritis.
Oderda GM; Balfe LM
J Manag Care Pharm; 2011; 17(9 Suppl B):S19-24. PubMed ID: 22073936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bringing liraglutide to market: a CER case study.
Oderda G; Sifford-Wilson SM
J Manag Care Pharm; 2012 Jun; 18(5 Supp A):S12-8. PubMed ID: 22663295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Safety interventions for the prevention of accidents at work: A systematic review.
Dyreborg J; Lipscomb HJ; Nielsen K; Törner M; Rasmussen K; Frydendall KB; Bay H; Gensby U; Bengtsen E; Guldenmund F; Kines P
Campbell Syst Rev; 2022 Jun; 18(2):e1234. PubMed ID: 36911341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Private manufacturers' thresholds to invest in comparative effectiveness trials.
Basu A; Meltzer D
Pharmacoeconomics; 2012 Oct; 30(10):859-68. PubMed ID: 22901018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Consensus of recommendations guiding comparative effectiveness research methods.
Morton JB; McConeghy R; Heinrich K; Gatto NM; Caffrey AR
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2016 Dec; 25(12):1354-1360. PubMed ID: 27365094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Overview, hurdles, and future work in adaptive designs: perspectives from a National Institutes of Health-funded workshop.
Coffey CS; Levin B; Clark C; Timmerman C; Wittes J; Gilbert P; Harris S
Clin Trials; 2012 Dec; 9(6):671-80. PubMed ID: 23250942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Stakeholder perspectives on adaptive clinical trials: a scoping review.
Madani Kia T; Marshall JC; Murthy S
Trials; 2020 Jun; 21(1):539. PubMed ID: 32552852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Online tools to synthesize real-world evidence of comparative effectiveness research to enhance formulary decision making.
Chen S; Graff J; Yun S; Beal B; Ta JT; Bansal A; Carlson JJ; Veenstra DL; Basu A; Devine B
J Manag Care Spec Pharm; 2021 Jan; 27(1):95-104. PubMed ID: 33377442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Implications of comparative effectiveness research for radiation oncology.
Bekelman JE; Shah A; Hahn SM
Pract Radiat Oncol; 2011; 1(2):72-80. PubMed ID: 24673918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Optimized adaptive enrichment designs for three-arm trials: learning which subpopulations benefit from different treatments.
Steingrimsson JA; Betz J; Qian T; Rosenblum M
Biostatistics; 2021 Apr; 22(2):283-297. PubMed ID: 31420983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Can CER be an effective tool for change in the development and assessment of new drugs and technologies?
Brixner DI; Watkins JB
J Manag Care Pharm; 2012 Jun; 18(5 Supp A):S06-11. PubMed ID: 22663293
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) within comparative effectiveness research: implications for clinical practice and health care policy.
Ahmed S; Berzon RA; Revicki DA; Lenderking WR; Moinpour CM; Basch E; Reeve BB; Wu AW;
Med Care; 2012 Dec; 50(12):1060-70. PubMed ID: 22922434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
