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.
159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28502812)
1. Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 7. Safety, quality and monitoring. Irving E; van den Bor R; Welsing P; Walsh V; Alfonso-Cristancho R; Harvey C; Garman N; Grobbee DE; J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Nov; 91():6-12. PubMed ID: 28502812 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 8. Data collection and management. Meinecke AK; Welsing P; Kafatos G; Burke D; Trelle S; Kubin M; Nachbaur G; Egger M; Zuidgeest M; J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Nov; 91():13-22. PubMed ID: 28716504 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 1. Introduction. Zuidgeest MGP; Goetz I; Groenwold RHH; Irving E; van Thiel GJMW; Grobbee DE; J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Aug; 88():7-13. PubMed ID: 28549929 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 3. Patient selection challenges and consequences. Oude Rengerink K; Kalkman S; Collier S; Ciaglia A; Worsley SD; Lightbourne A; Eckert L; Groenwold RHH; Grobbee DE; Irving EA; J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Sep; 89():173-180. PubMed ID: 28502808 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 5. Usual care and real life comparators. Zuidgeest MGP; Welsing PMJ; van Thiel GJMW; Ciaglia A; Alfonso-Cristancho R; Eckert L; Eijkemans MJC; Egger M; J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Oct; 90():92-98. PubMed ID: 28694123 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Stakeholders' views on the ethical challenges of pragmatic trials investigating pharmaceutical drugs. Kalkman S; van Thiel GJ; Grobbee DE; Meinecke AK; Zuidgeest MG; van Delden JJ; Trials; 2016 Aug; 17(1):419. PubMed ID: 27550379 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 6. Outcome measures in the real world. Welsing PM; Oude Rengerink K; Collier S; Eckert L; van Smeden M; Ciaglia A; Nachbaur G; Trelle S; Taylor AJ; Egger M; Goetz I; J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Oct; 90():99-107. PubMed ID: 28502810 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Pragmatic clinical trials in the context of regulation of medicines. Gedeborg R; Cline C; Zethelius B; Salmonson T Ups J Med Sci; 2019 Jan; 124(1):37-41. PubMed ID: 30251577 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Optimizing the design of pragmatic trials: key issues remain. Caro JJ; Ishak KJ J Comp Eff Res; 2012 Jul; 1(4):319-27. PubMed ID: 24237466 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Patients and investigators prefer measures of absolute risk in subgroups for pragmatic randomized trials. Murray EJ; Caniglia EC; Swanson SA; Hernández-Díaz S; Hernán MA J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Nov; 103():10-21. PubMed ID: 29966732 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 2. Setting, sites, and investigator selection. Worsley SD; Oude Rengerink K; Irving E; Lejeune S; Mol K; Collier S; Groenwold RHH; Enters-Weijnen C; Egger M; Rhodes T; J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Aug; 88():14-20. PubMed ID: 28502811 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Pragmatic study designs for older adults with cancer: Report from the U13 conference. Nipp RD; Yao NA; Lowenstein LM; Buckner JC; Parker IR; Gajra A; Morrison VA; Dale W; Ballman KV J Geriatr Oncol; 2016 Jul; 7(4):234-41. PubMed ID: 27197914 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Individualized versus standardized risk assessment in patients at high risk for adverse drug reactions (IDrug) - study protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Stingl JC; Kaumanns KL; Claus K; Lehmann ML; Kastenmüller K; Bleckwenn M; Hartmann G; Steffens M; Wirtz D; Leuchs AK; Benda N; Meier F; Schöffski O; Holdenrieder S; Coch C; Weckbecker K BMC Fam Pract; 2016 Apr; 17():49. PubMed ID: 27112273 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 4. Informed consent. Kalkman S; van Thiel GJMW; Zuidgeest MGP; Goetz I; Pfeiffer BM; Grobbee DE; van Delden JJM; J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Sep; 89():181-187. PubMed ID: 28502809 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Sources of Safety Data and Statistical Strategies for Design and Analysis: Real World Insights. Marchenko O; Russek-Cohen E; Levenson M; Zink RC; Krukas-Hampel MR; Jiang Q Ther Innov Regul Sci; 2018 Mar; 52(2):170-186. PubMed ID: 29714518 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Lessons learned in methods and analyses for pragmatic studies. Eckardt P; Erlanger AE Nurs Outlook; 2018 Sep; 66(5):446-454. PubMed ID: 30131168 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Real-world evidence : Benefits and limitations in multiple sclerosis research]. Ziemssen T; Rothenbacher D; Kuhle J; Berger T Nervenarzt; 2017 Oct; 88(10):1153-1158. PubMed ID: 28776214 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Framing the conversation: use of PRECIS-2 ratings to advance understanding of pragmatic trial design domains. Lipman PD; Loudon K; Dluzak L; Moloney R; Messner D; Stoney CM Trials; 2017 Nov; 18(1):532. PubMed ID: 29126437 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Applying the pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary to the implementation of a physical activity coaching trial in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Nguyen HQ; Moy ML; Fan VS; Gould MK; Xiang A; Bailey A; Desai S; Coleman KJ Nurs Outlook; 2018 Sep; 66(5):455-463. PubMed ID: 30144938 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]