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 *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27988952)

  • 1. Evidence for non-random sampling in randomised, controlled trials by Yuhji Saitoh.
    Carlisle JB; Loadsman JA
    Anaesthesia; 2017 Jan; 72(1):17-27. PubMed ID: 27988952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Data fabrication and other reasons for non-random sampling in 5087 randomised, controlled trials in anaesthetic and general medical journals.
    Carlisle JB
    Anaesthesia; 2017 Aug; 72(8):944-952. PubMed ID: 28580651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Calculating the probability of random sampling for continuous variables in submitted or published randomised controlled trials.
    Carlisle JB; Dexter F; Pandit JJ; Shafer SL; Yentis SM
    Anaesthesia; 2015 Jul; 70(7):848-58. PubMed ID: 26032950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Retraction of papers authored by Yuhji Saitoh - Beyond the Fujii phenomenon.
    Saikia P; Thakuria B
    Indian J Anaesth; 2019 Jul; 63(7):571-584. PubMed ID: 31391621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The analysis of 168 randomised controlled trials to test data integrity.
    Carlisle JB
    Anaesthesia; 2012 May; 67(5):521-537. PubMed ID: 22404311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An Appraisal of the Carlisle-Stouffer-Fisher Method for Assessing Study Data Integrity and Fraud.
    Mascha EJ; Vetter TR; Pittet JF
    Anesth Analg; 2017 Oct; 125(4):1381-1385. PubMed ID: 28786843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evidence for compromised data integrity in studies of liberal peri-operative inspired oxygen.
    Myles PS; Carlisle JB; Scarr B
    Anaesthesia; 2019 May; 74(5):573-584. PubMed ID: 30772931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An investigation of seven other publications by the first author of a retracted paper due to doubts about data integrity.
    Bordewijk EM; Li W; Gurrin LC; Thornton JG; van Wely M; Mol BW
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2021 Jun; 261():236-241. PubMed ID: 33985824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Baseline P value distributions in randomized trials were uniform for continuous but not categorical variables.
    Bolland MJ; Gamble GD; Avenell A; Grey A; Lumley T
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Aug; 112():67-76. PubMed ID: 31125614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Are these data real? Statistical methods for the detection of data fabrication in clinical trials.
    Al-Marzouki S; Evans S; Marshall T; Roberts I
    BMJ; 2005 Jul; 331(7511):267-70. PubMed ID: 16052019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Diagnosing fraudulent baseline data in clinical trials.
    Proschan MA; Shaw PA
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(9):e0239121. PubMed ID: 32998158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Mega-trials: methodological issues and clinical implications.
    Charlton BG
    J R Coll Physicians Lond; 1995; 29(2):96-100. PubMed ID: 7595900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Retracted publications in the drug literature.
    Samp JC; Schumock GT; Pickard AS
    Pharmacotherapy; 2012 Jul; 32(7):586-95. PubMed ID: 22581659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Data integrity of 35 randomised controlled trials in women' health.
    Bordewijk EM; Wang R; Askie LM; Gurrin LC; Thornton JG; van Wely M; Li W; Mol BW
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2020 Jun; 249():72-83. PubMed ID: 32381348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Multiplicity in oncology randomised controlled trials: a threat to medical evidence?
    Prasad V; Booth CM
    Lancet Oncol; 2019 Dec; 20(12):1638-1640. PubMed ID: 31797779
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials.
    Kunz R; Vist G; Oxman AD
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2007 Apr; (2):MR000012. PubMed ID: 17443633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of descriptions of allocation concealment in trial protocols and the published reports: cohort study.
    Pildal J; Chan AW; Hróbjartsson A; Forfang E; Altman DG; Gøtzsche PC
    BMJ; 2005 May; 330(7499):1049. PubMed ID: 15817527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: systematic review.
    Sun X; Briel M; Busse JW; You JJ; Akl EA; Mejza F; Bala MM; Bassler D; Mertz D; Diaz-Granados N; Vandvik PO; Malaga G; Srinathan SK; Dahm P; Johnston BC; Alonso-Coello P; Hassouneh B; Walter SD; Heels-Ansdell D; Bhatnagar N; Altman DG; Guyatt GH
    BMJ; 2012 Mar; 344():e1553. PubMed ID: 22422832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A meta-analysis of prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting: randomised controlled trials by Fujii et al. compared with other authors.
    Carlisle JB
    Anaesthesia; 2012 Oct; 67(10):1076-90. PubMed ID: 22734848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. On statistical methods to test if sampling in trials is genuinely random.
    Pandit JJ
    Anaesthesia; 2012 May; 67(5):456-462. PubMed ID: 22404285
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.