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 *

159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31871015)

  • 1. Identifying the 'incredible'! Part 1: assessing the risk of bias in outcomes included in systematic reviews.
    Büttner F; Winters M; Delahunt E; Elbers R; Lura CB; Khan KM; Weir A; Ardern CL
    Br J Sports Med; 2020 Jul; 54(13):798-800. PubMed ID: 31871015
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Identifying the 'incredible'! Part 2: Spot the difference - a rigorous risk of bias assessment can alter the main findings of a systematic review.
    Büttner F; Winters M; Delahunt E; Elbers R; Lura CB; Khan KM; Weir A; Ardern CL
    Br J Sports Med; 2020 Jul; 54(13):801-808. PubMed ID: 31871014
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Should this systematic review and meta-analysis change my practice? Part 2: exploring the role of the comparator, diversity, risk of bias and confidence.
    Travers MJ; Murphy MC; Debenham JR; Chivers P; Bulsara MK; Bagg MK; Palsson TS; Gibson W
    Br J Sports Med; 2019 Dec; 53(23):1493-1497. PubMed ID: 30962181
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Synthesising 'best evidence
    Ardern CL; Winters M
    Br J Sports Med; 2018 Aug; 52(15):948-949. PubMed ID: 28735285
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Reporting and Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Nursing Interventions in Patients With Alzheimer's Disease: General Implications of the Findings.
    Sun X; Zhou X; Zhang Y; Liu H
    J Nurs Scholarsh; 2019 May; 51(3):308-316. PubMed ID: 30806019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Systematic Reviews in Sports Medicine.
    DiSilvestro KJ; Tjoumakaris FP; Maltenfort MG; Spindler KP; Freedman KB
    Am J Sports Med; 2016 Feb; 44(2):533-8. PubMed ID: 25899433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Three risk of bias tools lead to opposite conclusions in observational research synthesis.
    Losilla JM; Oliveras I; Marin-Garcia JA; Vives J
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Sep; 101():61-72. PubMed ID: 29864541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Methodological quality and risk-of-bias assessments in systematic reviews of treatments for peri-implantitis.
    Hasuike A; Ueno D; Nagashima H; Kubota T; Tsukune N; Watanabe N; Sato S
    J Periodontal Res; 2019 Aug; 54(4):374-387. PubMed ID: 30671962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Was it a good idea to combine the studies? Why clinicians should care about heterogeneity when making decisions based on systematic reviews.
    Grindem H; Mansournia MA; Øiestad BE; Ardern CL
    Br J Sports Med; 2019 Apr; 53(7):399-401. PubMed ID: 30045836
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Different interventions, same outcomes? Here are four good reasons.
    Cook CE; George SZ; Keefe F
    Br J Sports Med; 2018 Aug; 52(15):951-952. PubMed ID: 29449207
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Recommendations for assessing the risk of bias in systematic reviews of health-care interventions.
    Viswanathan M; Patnode CD; Berkman ND; Bass EB; Chang S; Hartling L; Murad MH; Treadwell JR; Kane RL
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 May; 97():26-34. PubMed ID: 29248724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Common tool structures and approaches to risk of bias assessment: implications for systematic reviewers.
    Stone JC; Leonardi-Bee J; Barker TH; Sears K; Klugar M; Munn Z; Aromataris E
    JBI Evid Synth; 2024 Mar; 22(3):389-393. PubMed ID: 38385437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Trusting systematic reviews and meta-analyses: all that glitters is not gold!
    Weir A; Rabia S; Ardern C
    Br J Sports Med; 2016 Sep; 50(18):1100-1. PubMed ID: 26968215
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Appraisal of systematic reviews on the management of peri-implant diseases with two methodological tools.
    Faggion CM; Monje A; Wasiak J
    J Clin Periodontol; 2018 Jun; 45(6):754-766. PubMed ID: 29575189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Risk of bias assessments for selective reporting were inadequate in the majority of Cochrane reviews.
    Saric F; Barcot O; Puljak L
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Aug; 112():53-58. PubMed ID: 31009658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of methodological quality rating of systematic reviews on neuropathic pain using AMSTAR and R-AMSTAR.
    Dosenovic S; Jelicic Kadic A; Vucic K; Markovina N; Pieper D; Puljak L
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 May; 18(1):37. PubMed ID: 29739339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Should this systematic review and meta-analysis change my practice? Part 1: exploring treatment effect and trustworthiness.
    Travers MJ; Murphy MC; Debenham JR; Chivers P; Bulsara MK; Bagg MK; Palsson TS; Gibson W
    Br J Sports Med; 2019 Dec; 53(23):1488-1492. PubMed ID: 30962182
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Abstract analysis method facilitates filtering low-methodological quality and high-bias risk systematic reviews on psoriasis interventions.
    Gómez-García F; Ruano J; Aguilar-Luque M; Alcalde-Mellado P; Gay-Mimbrera J; Hernández-Romero JL; Sanz-Cabanillas JL; Maestre-López B; González-Padilla M; Carmona-Fernández PJ; García-Nieto AV; Isla-Tejera B
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Dec; 17(1):180. PubMed ID: 29284417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.