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 *

141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31051247)

  • 1. PubMed coverage varied across specialties and over time: a large-scale study of included studies in Cochrane reviews.
    Frandsen TF; Eriksen MB; Hammer DMG; Christensen JB
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Aug; 112():59-66. PubMed ID: 31051247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Using Embase as a supplement to PubMed in Cochrane reviews differed across fields.
    Frandsen TF; Eriksen MB; Hammer DMG; Christensen JB; Wallin JA
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 May; 133():24-31. PubMed ID: 33359253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Searching for qualitative health research required several databases and alternative search strategies: a study of coverage in bibliographic databases.
    Frandsen TF; Gildberg FA; Tingleff EB
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Oct; 114():118-124. PubMed ID: 31251982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A comparison of the performance of seven key bibliographic databases in identifying all relevant systematic reviews of interventions for hypertension.
    Rathbone J; Carter M; Hoffmann T; Glasziou P
    Syst Rev; 2016 Feb; 5():27. PubMed ID: 26862061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Study filters for non-randomized studies of interventions consistently lacked sensitivity upon external validation.
    Hausner E; Metzendorf MI; Richter B; Lotz F; Waffenschmidt S
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Dec; 18(1):171. PubMed ID: 30563471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Using the full PICO model as a search tool for systematic reviews resulted in lower recall for some PICO elements.
    Frandsen TF; Bruun Nielsen MF; Lindhardt CL; Eriksen MB
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Nov; 127():69-75. PubMed ID: 32679315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The comparative recall of Google Scholar versus PubMed in identical searches for biomedical systematic reviews: a review of searches used in systematic reviews.
    Bramer WM; Giustini D; Kramer BM; Anderson P
    Syst Rev; 2013 Dec; 2():115. PubMed ID: 24360284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies.
    Cooper C; Booth A; Varley-Campbell J; Britten N; Garside R
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Aug; 18(1):85. PubMed ID: 30107788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Getting to know journal bibliographic databases.
    Ng KH; Peh WC
    Singapore Med J; 2010 Oct; 51(10):757-60; quiz 761. PubMed ID: 21103809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Information sources for obesity prevention policy research: a review of systematic reviews.
    Hanneke R; Young SK
    Syst Rev; 2017 Aug; 6(1):156. PubMed ID: 28789703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Is the coverage of Google Scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews.
    Gehanno JF; Rollin L; Darmoni S
    BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2013 Jan; 13():7. PubMed ID: 23302542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Gaps in affiliation indexing in Scopus and PubMed.
    Schmidt CM; Cox R; Fial AV; Hartman TL; Magee ML
    J Med Libr Assoc; 2016 Apr; 104(2):138-42. PubMed ID: 27076801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Embase is a central resource for literature search in health science].
    Eriksen MB; Christensen JB; Frandsen TF
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2016 Jun; 178(23):. PubMed ID: 27292575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Single screening versus conventional double screening for study selection in systematic reviews: a methodological systematic review.
    Waffenschmidt S; Knelangen M; Sieben W; Bühn S; Pieper D
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Jun; 19(1):132. PubMed ID: 31253092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Literature searching for randomized controlled trials used in Cochrane reviews: rapid versus exhaustive searches.
    Royle P; Milne R
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2003; 19(4):591-603. PubMed ID: 15095765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Should we search Chinese biomedical databases when performing systematic reviews?
    Cohen JF; Korevaar DA; Wang J; Spijker R; Bossuyt PM
    Syst Rev; 2015 Mar; 4():23. PubMed ID: 25874584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Machine learning reduced workload with minimal risk of missing studies: development and evaluation of a randomized controlled trial classifier for Cochrane Reviews.
    Thomas J; McDonald S; Noel-Storr A; Shemilt I; Elliott J; Mavergames C; Marshall IJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 May; 133():140-151. PubMed ID: 33171275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Conduct and reporting of citation searching in Cochrane systematic reviews: A cross-sectional study.
    Briscoe S; Bethel A; Rogers M
    Res Synth Methods; 2020 Mar; 11(2):169-180. PubMed ID: 31127978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A review of the reporting of web searching to identify studies for Cochrane systematic reviews.
    Briscoe S
    Res Synth Methods; 2018 Mar; 9(1):89-99. PubMed ID: 29065246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cochrane systematic reviews in acupuncture: methodological diversity in database searching.
    Sood A; Sood R; Bauer BA; Ebbert JO
    J Altern Complement Med; 2005 Aug; 11(4):719-22. PubMed ID: 16131298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.