240 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28923006)
1. Repeat: a framework to assess empirical reproducibility in biomedical research.
McIntosh LD; Juehne A; Vitale CRH; Liu X; Alcoser R; Lukas JC; Evanoff B
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Sep; 17(1):143. PubMed ID: 28923006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Improving transparency and scientific rigor in academic publishing.
Prager EM; Chambers KE; Plotkin JL; McArthur DL; Bandrowski AE; Bansal N; Martone ME; Bergstrom HC; Bespalov A; Graf C
J Neurosci Res; 2019 Apr; 97(4):377-390. PubMed ID: 30506706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Considerations for Integration of Perioperative Electronic Health Records Across Institutions for Research and Quality Improvement: The Approach Taken by the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group.
Colquhoun DA; Shanks AM; Kapeles SR; Shah N; Saager L; Vaughn MT; Buehler K; Burns ML; Tremper KK; Freundlich RE; Aziz M; Kheterpal S; Mathis MR
Anesth Analg; 2020 May; 130(5):1133-1146. PubMed ID: 32287121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Avoiding and identifying errors in health technology assessment models: qualitative study and methodological review.
Chilcott J; Tappenden P; Rawdin A; Johnson M; Kaltenthaler E; Paisley S; Papaioannou D; Shippam A
Health Technol Assess; 2010 May; 14(25):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-107. PubMed ID: 20501062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Assessing Real-World Data From Electronic Health Records for Health Technology Assessment: The SUITABILITY Checklist: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force.
Fleurence RL; Kent S; Adamson B; Tcheng J; Balicer R; Ross JS; Haynes K; Muller P; Campbell J; Bouée-Benhamiche E; García Martí S; Ramsey S
Value Health; 2024 Jun; 27(6):692-701. PubMed ID: 38871437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Data quality assessment framework to assess electronic medical record data for use in research.
Reimer AP; Milinovich A; Madigan EA
Int J Med Inform; 2016 Jun; 90():40-7. PubMed ID: 27103196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Recommendations to enhance rigor and reproducibility in biomedical research.
Brito JJ; Li J; Moore JH; Greene CS; Nogoy NA; Garmire LX; Mangul S
Gigascience; 2020 Jun; 9(6):. PubMed ID: 32479592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Tools used to assess the quality of peer review reports: a methodological systematic review.
Superchi C; González JA; Solà I; Cobo E; Hren D; Boutron I
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Mar; 19(1):48. PubMed ID: 30841850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Methods for enhancing the reproducibility of biomedical research findings using electronic health records.
Denaxas S; Direk K; Gonzalez-Izquierdo A; Pikoula M; Cakiroglu A; Moore J; Hemingway H; Smeeth L
BioData Min; 2017; 10():31. PubMed ID: 28912836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Promoting Responsible Electronic Documentation: Validity Evidence for a Checklist to Assess Progress Notes in the Electronic Health Record.
Bierman JA; Hufmeyer KK; Liss DT; Weaver AC; Heiman HL
Teach Learn Med; 2017; 29(4):420-432. PubMed ID: 28497983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Establishing Institutional Scores With the Rigor and Transparency Index: Large-scale Analysis of Scientific Reporting Quality.
Menke J; Eckmann P; Ozyurt IB; Roelandse M; Anderson N; Grethe J; Gamst A; Bandrowski A
J Med Internet Res; 2022 Jun; 24(6):e37324. PubMed ID: 35759334
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Data Quality in Health Research: Integrative Literature Review.
Bernardi FA; Alves D; Crepaldi N; Yamada DB; Lima VC; Rijo R
J Med Internet Res; 2023 Oct; 25():e41446. PubMed ID: 37906223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany].
Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2008 Dec; 133 Suppl 7():S225-46. PubMed ID: 19034813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A checklist is associated with increased quality of reporting preclinical biomedical research: A systematic review.
Han S; Olonisakin TF; Pribis JP; Zupetic J; Yoon JH; Holleran KM; Jeong K; Shaikh N; Rubio DM; Lee JS
PLoS One; 2017; 12(9):e0183591. PubMed ID: 28902887
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Improving transparency and scientific rigor in academic publishing.
Prager EM; Chambers KE; Plotkin JL; McArthur DL; Bandrowski AE; Bansal N; Martone ME; Bergstrom HC; Bespalov A; Graf C
Brain Behav; 2019 Jan; 9(1):e01141. PubMed ID: 30506879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Irreproducibility in Preclinical Biomedical Research: Perceptions, Uncertainties, and Knowledge Gaps.
Jarvis MF; Williams M
Trends Pharmacol Sci; 2016 Apr; 37(4):290-302. PubMed ID: 26776451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Use and Understanding of Anonymization and De-Identification in the Biomedical Literature: Scoping Review.
Chevrier R; Foufi V; Gaudet-Blavignac C; Robert A; Lovis C
J Med Internet Res; 2019 May; 21(5):e13484. PubMed ID: 31152528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Improving transparency and scientific rigor in academic publishing.
Prager EM; Chambers KE; Plotkin JL; McArthur DL; Bandrowski AE; Bansal N; Martone ME; Bergstrom HC; Bespalov A; Graf C
Cancer Rep (Hoboken); 2019 Feb; 2(1):e1150. PubMed ID: 32721132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Reproducible research practices, transparency, and open access data in the biomedical literature, 2015-2017.
Wallach JD; Boyack KW; Ioannidis JPA
PLoS Biol; 2018 Nov; 16(11):e2006930. PubMed ID: 30457984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
