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 *

262 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30047306)

  • 1. Appraising Qualitative Research for Evidence Syntheses: A Compendium of Quality Appraisal Tools.
    Majid U; Vanstone M
    Qual Health Res; 2018 Nov; 28(13):2115-2131. PubMed ID: 30047306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review.
    Zeng X; Zhang Y; Kwong JS; Zhang C; Li S; Sun F; Niu Y; Du L
    J Evid Based Med; 2015 Feb; 8(1):2-10. PubMed ID: 25594108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Systematic mapping of existing tools to appraise methodological strengths and limitations of qualitative research: first stage in the development of the CAMELOT tool.
    Munthe-Kaas HM; Glenton C; Booth A; Noyes J; Lewin S
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Jun; 19(1):113. PubMed ID: 31164084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The development and validation of a meta-tool for quality appraisal of public health evidence: Meta Quality Appraisal Tool (MetaQAT).
    Rosella L; Bowman C; Pach B; Morgan S; Fitzpatrick T; Goel V
    Public Health; 2016 Jul; 136():57-65. PubMed ID: 26993202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A scoping review found increasing examples of rapid qualitative evidence syntheses and no methodological guidance.
    Campbell F; Weeks L; Booth A; Kaunelis D; Smith A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Nov; 115():160-171. PubMed ID: 31229582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.
    Eddy K; Jordan Z; Stephenson M
    JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep; 2016 Apr; 14(4):96-137. PubMed ID: 27532314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools.
    Katrak P; Bialocerkowski AE; Massy-Westropp N; Kumar S; Grimmer KA
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2004 Sep; 4():22. PubMed ID: 15369598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Quality assessment of qualitative evidence for systematic review and synthesis: Is it meaningful, and if so, how should it be performed?
    Carroll C; Booth A
    Res Synth Methods; 2015 Jun; 6(2):149-54. PubMed ID: 26099483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect?
    Allen D; Rixson L
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2008 Mar; 6(1):78-110. PubMed ID: 21631815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research.
    Masood M; Thaliath ET; Bower EJ; Newton JT
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 2011 Jun; 39(3):193-203. PubMed ID: 21070318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A Guide to Writing a Qualitative Systematic Review Protocol to Enhance Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Health Care.
    Butler A; Hall H; Copnell B
    Worldviews Evid Based Nurs; 2016 Jun; 13(3):241-9. PubMed ID: 26790142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Improving the usefulness of a tool for appraising the quality of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies, the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).
    Hong QN; Gonzalez-Reyes A; Pluye P
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2018 Jun; 24(3):459-467. PubMed ID: 29464873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of the effects of using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool versus informal appraisal in assessing health research: a randomised trial.
    Crowe M; Sheppard L; Campbell A
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2011 Dec; 9(4):444-9. PubMed ID: 22093394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Quality appraisal in systematic reviews of public health interventions: an empirical study on the impact of choice of tool on meta-analysis.
    Voss PH; Rehfuess EA
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 2013 Jan; 67(1):98-104. PubMed ID: 22851579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Development of the ASSESS tool: a comprehenSive tool to Support rEporting and critical appraiSal of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods implementation reSearch outcomes.
    Ryan N; Vieira D; Gyamfi J; Ojo T; Shelley D; Ogedegbe O; Iwelunmor J; Peprah E
    Implement Sci Commun; 2022 Mar; 3(1):34. PubMed ID: 35346390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Inclusive critical appraisal of qualitative and quantitative findings in evidence synthesis.
    Olaghere A; Wilson DB; Kimbrell C
    Res Synth Methods; 2023 Nov; 14(6):847-852. PubMed ID: 37525470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A comparative analysis of three online appraisal instruments' ability to assess validity in qualitative research.
    Hannes K; Lockwood C; Pearson A
    Qual Health Res; 2010 Dec; 20(12):1736-43. PubMed ID: 20671302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool: a modified e-Delphi study.
    Hong QN; Pluye P; Fàbregues S; Bartlett G; Boardman F; Cargo M; Dagenais P; Gagnon MP; Griffiths F; Nicolau B; O'Cathain A; Rousseau MC; Vedel I
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Jul; 111():49-59.e1. PubMed ID: 30905698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Crowdsourcing critical appraisal of research evidence (CrowdCARE) was found to be a valid approach to assessing clinical research quality.
    Pianta MJ; Makrai E; Verspoor KM; Cohn TA; Downie LE
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Dec; 104():8-14. PubMed ID: 30075189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.