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 *

97 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27816308)

  • 1. [The evaluation of pharmacological drugs, medical devices, and non-pharmacological or public health interventions: Experimental design limitations. Moving towards new methods?].
    Villeval M; Carayol M; Lamy S; Lepage B; Lang T
    Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique; 2016 Dec; 64(6):381-389. PubMed ID: 27816308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Patient-specific devices and population-level evidence: evaluating therapeutic interventions with inherent variation.
    Walker MJ
    Med Health Care Philos; 2018 Sep; 21(3):335-345. PubMed ID: 29052083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies in the assessment of drug safety.
    Sawchik J; Hamdani J; Vanhaeverbeek M
    Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique; 2018 May; 66(3):217-225. PubMed ID: 29685700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The cohort multiple randomized controlled trial design: a valid and efficient alternative to pragmatic trials?
    van der Velden JM; Verkooijen HM; Young-Afat DA; Burbach JP; van Vulpen M; Relton C; van Gils CH; May AM; Groenwold RH
    Int J Epidemiol; 2017 Feb; 46(1):96-102. PubMed ID: 27118559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. To randomise or not to randomise: methodological pitfalls of the RCT design in psychosocial intervention studies.
    Bottomley A
    Eur J Cancer Care (Engl); 1997 Sep; 6(3):222-30. PubMed ID: 9335674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Circular instead of hierarchical: methodological principles for the evaluation of complex interventions.
    Walach H; Falkenberg T; Fønnebø V; Lewith G; Jonas WB
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2006 Jun; 6():29. PubMed ID: 16796762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Redefining the randomized controlled trial in the context of acupuncture research.
    Walji R; Boon H
    Complement Ther Clin Pract; 2006 May; 12(2):91-6. PubMed ID: 16648085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Methodological issues and complementary therapies: researching intangibles?
    Carter B
    Complement Ther Nurs Midwifery; 2003 Aug; 9(3):133-9. PubMed ID: 12852929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Notes on the use of randomised controlled trials to evaluate complex interventions: Community treatment orders as an illustrative case.
    Mustafa FA
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2017 Feb; 23(1):185-192. PubMed ID: 28090729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The randomized controlled trial: gold standard, or merely standard?
    Grossman J; Mackenzie FJ
    Perspect Biol Med; 2005; 48(4):516-34. PubMed ID: 16227664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Methodological idiosyncracies, frameworks and challenges of non-pharmaceutical and non-technical treatment interventions.
    Schünemann HJ
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2013; 107(3):214-20. PubMed ID: 23790697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [How may practitioners interpret the results of clinical trials?].
    Azorin JM; Adida M; Blin O; Simon N; Fakra E; Cermolacce M; Bottai T; Pringuey D; Micoulaud-Franchi JA; Belzeaux R; Kaladjian A
    Encephale; 2016 Dec; 42(6S):S26-S29. PubMed ID: 28236989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evidence-based medicine: four fundamental problems with the randomized clinical trial (RCT) used to document chemical medicine.
    Ventegodt S; Andersen NJ; Brom B; Merrick J; Greydanus DE
    Int J Adolesc Med Health; 2009; 21(4):485-96. PubMed ID: 20306761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Clinical trials: methodological requirements and interpretation].
    Windeler J; Lange S
    Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz; 2009 Apr; 52(4):394-401. PubMed ID: 19322527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Limitations of the randomized controlled trial in evaluating population-based health interventions.
    Sanson-Fisher RW; Bonevski B; Green LW; D'Este C
    Am J Prev Med; 2007 Aug; 33(2):155-61. PubMed ID: 17673104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. System impact research - increasing public health and health care system performance.
    Malmivaara A
    Ann Med; 2016; 48(4):211-5. PubMed ID: 26977939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Randomized clinical trials: the meeting place of medical practice and clinical research.
    Hughes EG
    Semin Reprod Med; 2003 Feb; 21(1):55-64. PubMed ID: 12806560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Complexity and indeterminism of evidence-based public health: an analytical framework.
    Attena F
    Med Health Care Philos; 2014 Aug; 17(3):459-65. PubMed ID: 24634100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. What's in a gold standard? In defence of randomised controlled trials.
    Backmann M
    Med Health Care Philos; 2017 Dec; 20(4):513-523. PubMed ID: 28432483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Outcome reporting bias in evaluations of public health interventions: evidence of impact and the potential role of a study register.
    Pearson M; Peters J
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 2012 Apr; 66(4):286-9. PubMed ID: 21652522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.