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.
210 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29224503)
21. How Efficacious is Danshen (Salvia miltiorrhiza) Dripping Pill in Treating Angina Pectoris? Evidence Assessment for Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Jia Y; Leung SW J Altern Complement Med; 2017 Sep; 23(9):676-684. PubMed ID: 28650203 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Trial sequential analyses of meta-analyses of complications in laparoscopic vs. small-incision cholecystectomy: more randomized patients are needed. Keus F; Wetterslev J; Gluud C; Gooszen HG; van Laarhoven CJ J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Mar; 63(3):246-56. PubMed ID: 20004553 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Assessment of risk of bias in quasi-randomized controlled trials and randomized controlled trials reported in the Kim JH; Kim TK; In J; Lee DK; Lee S; Kang H Korean J Anesthesiol; 2017 Oct; 70(5):511-519. PubMed ID: 29046770 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Risk-of-bias assessment using Cochrane's revised tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) was useful but challenging and resource-intensive: observations from a systematic review. Crocker TF; Lam N; Jordão M; Brundle C; Prescott M; Forster A; Ensor J; Gladman J; Clegg A J Clin Epidemiol; 2023 Sep; 161():39-45. PubMed ID: 37364620 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. DEPERROR: Risks of systematic errors in drug and non-drug randomized clinical trials assessing intervention effects in patients with unipolar depression. Krogh J; Hjorthøj CR; Jakobsen JC; Lindschou J; Kessing LV; Nordentoft M; Gluud C J Affect Disord; 2015 Jul; 179():121-7. PubMed ID: 25863907 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews of Non-Randomized Studies of Adverse Cardiovascular Effects of Thiazolidinediones and Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors: Application of a New Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Bilandzic A; Fitzpatrick T; Rosella L; Henry D PLoS Med; 2016 Apr; 13(4):e1001987. PubMed ID: 27046153 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. What meta-analyses have and have not taught us about psychotherapy effects: a review and future directions. Matt GE; Navarro AM Clin Psychol Rev; 1997; 17(1):1-32. PubMed ID: 9125365 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. [Outcomes in randomized trials: Typology, relevance and importance for their standardization. Example of renoprotection]. Sautenet B; Halimi JM; Caille A; Giraudeau B Presse Med; 2015 Nov; 44(11):1096-102. PubMed ID: 26454307 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. There were large discrepancies in risk of bias tool judgments when a randomized controlled trial appeared in more than one systematic review. Jordan VM; Lensen SF; Farquhar CM J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Jan; 81():72-76. PubMed ID: 27622779 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Quality Assessment of Studies Included in Cochrane Oral Health Systematic Reviews: A Meta-Research. Sofi-Mahmudi A; Iranparvar P; Shakiba M; Shamsoddin E; Mohammad-Rahimi H; Naseri S; Motie P; Tovani-Palone MR; Mesgarpour B Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2021 Jul; 18(14):. PubMed ID: 34299733 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Solving problems with randomized clinical trials is not enough to improve psychotherapy outcome: comments on Krause. Lambert MJ Psychotherapy (Chic); 2011 Sep; 48(3):229-30; discussion 234-6. PubMed ID: 21875237 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effects of personalized prediction and adaptation tools on treatment outcome in outpatient psychotherapy: study protocol. Lutz W; Zimmermann D; Müller VNLS; Deisenhofer AK; Rubel JA BMC Psychiatry; 2017 Aug; 17(1):306. PubMed ID: 28836954 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Quality and consistency of outcome reporting in clinical trials of immunosuppression in renal transplantation. Hussain S; Knight SR Clin Transplant; 2016 Nov; 30(11):1440-1448. PubMed ID: 27582408 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Most Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool. Martimbianco ALC; Sá KMM; Santos GM; Santos EM; Pacheco RL; Riera R Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992); 2023; 69(3):469-472. PubMed ID: 36820779 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Impact of Selection Bias on Treatment Effect Size Estimates in Randomized Trials of Oral Health Interventions: A Meta-epidemiological Study. Saltaji H; Armijo-Olivo S; Cummings GG; Amin M; da Costa BR; Flores-Mir C J Dent Res; 2018 Jan; 97(1):5-13. PubMed ID: 28813182 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Reporting quality and risk of bias in randomised trials in health professions education. Horsley T; Galipeau J; Petkovic J; Zeiter J; Hamstra SJ; Cook DA Med Educ; 2017 Jan; 51(1):61-71. PubMed ID: 27981660 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. The outcome of psychotherapy: yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Miller SD; Hubble MA; Chow DL; Seidel JA Psychotherapy (Chic); 2013 Mar; 50(1):88-97. PubMed ID: 23505984 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. [Application of the Risk of Bias 2 Tool]. Lee LL Hu Li Za Zhi; 2021 Apr; 68(2):85-91. PubMed ID: 33792022 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Can psychotherapists function as their own controls? Meta-analysis of the crossed therapist design in comparative psychotherapy trials. Falkenström F; Markowitz JC; Jonker H; Philips B; Holmqvist R J Clin Psychiatry; 2013 May; 74(5):482-91. PubMed ID: 23146326 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]