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 *

254 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29032590)

  • 21. Practical guide to undertaking scoping reviews for pharmacy clinicians, researchers and policymakers.
    Khalil H; McInerney P; Pollock D; Alexander L; Munn Z; Tricco AC; Godfrey CM; Peters MDJ
    J Clin Pharm Ther; 2022 Feb; 47(2):129-134. PubMed ID: 34714560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach.
    Munn Z; Peters MDJ; Stern C; Tufanaru C; McArthur A; Aromataris E
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Nov; 18(1):143. PubMed ID: 30453902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A mixed-methods approach to systematic reviews.
    Pearson A; White H; Bath-Hextall F; Salmond S; Apostolo J; Kirkpatrick P
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2015 Sep; 13(3):121-31. PubMed ID: 26196082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Policies supporting informal caregivers across Canada: a scoping review protocol.
    Khayatzadeh-Mahani A; Leslie M
    BMJ Open; 2018 Jun; 8(6):e019220. PubMed ID: 29950457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The systematic review of the literature: a tool for evidence-based policy.
    Houde SC
    J Gerontol Nurs; 2009 Sep; 35(9):9-12. PubMed ID: 19715255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Mismatches in the production of a scoping review: Highlighting the interplay of (in)formalities.
    Sager M; Pistone I
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2019 Dec; 25(6):930-937. PubMed ID: 31368185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Knowledge Syntheses in Medical Education: Demystifying Scoping Reviews.
    Thomas A; Lubarsky S; Durning SJ; Young ME
    Acad Med; 2017 Feb; 92(2):161-166. PubMed ID: 27782918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Evaluation of the JBI scoping reviews methodology by current users.
    Khalil H; Bennett M; Godfrey C; McInerney P; Munn Z; Peters M
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2020 Mar; 18(1):95-100. PubMed ID: 31567603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Global priority setting for Cochrane systematic reviews of health promotion and public health research.
    Doyle J; Waters E; Yach D; McQueen D; De Francisco A; Stewart T; Reddy P; Gulmezoglu AM; Galea G; Portela A
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 2005 Mar; 59(3):193-7. PubMed ID: 15709077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Conducting systematic reviews of economic evaluations.
    Gomersall JS; Jadotte YT; Xue Y; Lockwood S; Riddle D; Preda A
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2015 Sep; 13(3):170-8. PubMed ID: 26288063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Designing, planning, and conducting systematic reviews and other knowledge syntheses: Six key practical recommendations to improve feasibility and efficiency.
    Fontaine G; Maheu-Cadotte MA; Lavallée A; Mailhot T; Lavoie P; Rouleau G; Vinette B; García MR; Bourbonnais A
    Worldviews Evid Based Nurs; 2022 Dec; 19(6):434-441. PubMed ID: 36317824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency.
    Pham MT; Rajić A; Greig JD; Sargeant JM; Papadopoulos A; McEwen SA
    Res Synth Methods; 2014 Dec; 5(4):371-85. PubMed ID: 26052958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Risk of bias in overviews of reviews: a scoping review of methodological guidance and four-item checklist.
    Ballard M; Montgomery P
    Res Synth Methods; 2017 Mar; 8(1):92-108. PubMed ID: 28074553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting.
    Colquhoun HL; Levac D; O'Brien KK; Straus S; Tricco AC; Perrier L; Kastner M; Moher D
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2014 Dec; 67(12):1291-4. PubMed ID: 25034198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Variable participation of knowledge users in cancer health services research: results of a multiple case study.
    O'Brien MA; Carson A; Barbera L; Brouwers MC; Earle CC; Graham ID; Mittmann N; Grunfeld E
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Nov; 18(1):150. PubMed ID: 30466391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Evidence and Health Policy: Using and Regulating Systematic Reviews.
    Fox DM
    Am J Public Health; 2017 Jan; 107(1):88-92. PubMed ID: 27854522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The ISPOR Good Practices for Quality Improvement of Cost-Effectiveness Research Task Force Report.
    McGhan WF; Al M; Doshi JA; Kamae I; Marx SE; Rindress D
    Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1086-99. PubMed ID: 19744291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The Role of the Nurse Scientist as a Knowledge Broker.
    Thompson MR; Schwartz Barcott D
    J Nurs Scholarsh; 2019 Jan; 51(1):26-39. PubMed ID: 30354032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Trainee-led research using an integrated knowledge translation or other research partnership approaches: a scoping reviews.
    Cassidy CE; Shin HD; Ramage E; Conway A; Mrklas K; Laur C; Beck A; Varin MD; Steinwender S; Nguyen T; Langley J; Dorey R; Donnelly L; Ormel I
    Health Res Policy Syst; 2021 Nov; 19(1):135. PubMed ID: 34727926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Knowledge synthesis, translation and exchange in public health and health promotion: the role of a Cochrane Review Group.
    Waters E; Armstrong R
    Promot Educ; 2007; 14(1):34-5. PubMed ID: 17526322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.