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 *

162 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31229582)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews.
    Peters MDJ; Marnie C; Tricco AC; Pollock D; Munn Z; Alexander L; McInerney P; Godfrey CM; Khalil H
    JBI Evid Implement; 2021 Mar; 19(1):3-10. PubMed ID: 33570328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review protocol.
    Iannizzi C; Akl EA; Kahale LA; Dorando E; Mosunmola Aminat A; Barker JM; McKenzie JE; Haddaway NR; Piechotta V; Skoetz N
    F1000Res; 2021; 10():802. PubMed ID: 35186269
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Summarizing systematic reviews: methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach.
    Aromataris E; Fernandez R; Godfrey CM; Holly C; Khalil H; Tungpunkom P
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2015 Sep; 13(3):132-40. PubMed ID: 26360830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Few evaluative studies exist examining rapid review methodology across stages of conduct: a systematic scoping review.
    Hamel C; Michaud A; Thuku M; Affengruber L; Skidmore B; Nussbaumer-Streit B; Stevens A; Garritty C
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Oct; 126():131-140. PubMed ID: 32599023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews.
    Garritty C; Gartlehner G; Nussbaumer-Streit B; King VJ; Hamel C; Kamel C; Affengruber L; Stevens A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 Feb; 130():13-22. PubMed ID: 33068715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews.
    Peters MDJ; Marnie C; Tricco AC; Pollock D; Munn Z; Alexander L; McInerney P; Godfrey CM; Khalil H
    JBI Evid Synth; 2020 Oct; 18(10):2119-2126. PubMed ID: 33038124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Scoping Review on Rehabilitation Scoping Reviews.
    Colquhoun HL; Jesus TS; O'Brien KK; Tricco AC; Chui A; Zarin W; Lillie E; Hitzig SL; Seaton S; Engel L; Rotenberg S; Straus SE
    Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2020 Aug; 101(8):1462-1469. PubMed ID: 32325163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. What guidance is available for researchers conducting overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions? A scoping review and qualitative metasummary.
    Pollock M; Fernandes RM; Becker LA; Featherstone R; Hartling L
    Syst Rev; 2016 Nov; 5(1):190. PubMed ID: 27842604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings-paper 3: how to assess methodological limitations.
    Munthe-Kaas H; Bohren MA; Glenton C; Lewin S; Noyes J; Tunçalp Ö; Booth A; Garside R; Colvin CJ; Wainwright M; Rashidian A; Flottorp S; Carlsen B
    Implement Sci; 2018 Jan; 13(Suppl 1):9. PubMed ID: 29384078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Searching for qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: a structured methodological review.
    Booth A
    Syst Rev; 2016 May; 5():74. PubMed ID: 27145932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Same family, different species: methodological conduct and quality varies according to purpose for five types of knowledge synthesis.
    Tricco AC; Zarin W; Ghassemi M; Nincic V; Lillie E; Page MJ; Shamseer L; Antony J; Rios P; Hwee J; Veroniki AA; Moher D; Hartling L; Pham B; Straus SE
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Apr; 96():133-142. PubMed ID: 29103958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews.
    Tricco AC; Lillie E; Zarin W; O'Brien K; Colquhoun H; Kastner M; Levac D; Ng C; Sharpe JP; Wilson K; Kenny M; Warren R; Wilson C; Stelfox HT; Straus SE
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Feb; 16():15. PubMed ID: 26857112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application.
    Peters MDJ; Marnie C; Colquhoun H; Garritty CM; Hempel S; Horsley T; Langlois EV; Lillie E; O'Brien KK; Tunçalp Ӧ; Wilson MG; Zarin W; Tricco AC
    Syst Rev; 2021 Oct; 10(1):263. PubMed ID: 34625095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Rapid reviews of medical tests used many similar methods to systematic reviews but key items were rarely reported: a scoping review.
    Arevalo-Rodriguez I; Moreno-Nunez P; Nussbaumer-Streit B; Steingart KR; González Peña LDM; Buitrago-Garcia D; Kaunelis D; Emparanza JI; Alonso-Coello P; Tricco AC; Zamora J
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Dec; 116():98-105. PubMed ID: 31521724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. What are the best methodologies for rapid reviews of the research evidence for evidence-informed decision making in health policy and practice: a rapid review.
    Haby MM; Chapman E; Clark R; Barreto J; Reveiz L; Lavis JN
    Health Res Policy Syst; 2016 Nov; 14(1):83. PubMed ID: 27884208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.