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.
112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32493444)
1. Changes to aspects of ongoing randomised controlled trials with fixed designs. Coskinas X; Simes J; Schou M; Martin AJ Trials; 2020 Jun; 21(1):457. PubMed ID: 32493444 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Reacting to prognostic covariate imbalance in randomised controlled trials. Coskinas X; Schou IM; Simes J; Martin A Contemp Clin Trials; 2021 Nov; 110():106544. PubMed ID: 34454099 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Are current standards of reporting quality for clinical trials sufficient in addressing important sources of bias? Mills EJ; Ayers D; Chou R; Thorlund K Contemp Clin Trials; 2015 Nov; 45(Pt A):2-7. PubMed ID: 26232560 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. Philips Z; Ginnelly L; Sculpher M; Claxton K; Golder S; Riemsma R; Woolacoot N; Glanville J Health Technol Assess; 2004 Sep; 8(36):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-158. PubMed ID: 15361314 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials. Kunz R; Vist G; Oxman AD Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2007 Apr; (2):MR000012. PubMed ID: 17443633 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Healthcare Research into Anti-VEGF Therapy: Selection and Methodological Precautions]. Ziemssen F; Stahl A; Dimopoulos S Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2017 Dec; 234(12):1483-1492. PubMed ID: 28834972 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. How to design a randomised controlled trial. Brocklehurst P; Hoare Z Br Dent J; 2017 May; 222(9):721-726. PubMed ID: 28496211 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Multiple imputation for patient reported outcome measures in randomised controlled trials: advantages and disadvantages of imputing at the item, subscale or composite score level. Rombach I; Gray AM; Jenkinson C; Murray DW; Rivero-Arias O BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Aug; 18(1):87. PubMed ID: 30153796 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quantitative evaluation of single-arm versus randomized phase II cancer clinical trials. Pond GR; Abbasi S Clin Trials; 2011 Jun; 8(3):260-9. PubMed ID: 21511687 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Exact group-sequential designs for clinical trials with randomized play-the-winner allocation. Stallard N; Rosenberger WF Stat Med; 2002 Feb; 21(4):467-80. PubMed ID: 11836730 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of dose-finding designs for narrow-therapeutic-index drugs: concentration-controlled vs. dose-controlled trials. Lledó-García R; Hennig S; Karlsson MO Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2009 Jul; 86(1):62-9. PubMed ID: 19339964 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Design characteristics, risk of bias, and reporting of randomised controlled trials supporting approvals of cancer drugs by European Medicines Agency, 2014-16: cross sectional analysis. Naci H; Davis C; Savović J; Higgins JPT; Sterne JAC; Gyawali B; Romo-Sandoval X; Handley N; Booth CM BMJ; 2019 Sep; 366():l5221. PubMed ID: 31533922 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessing the impact of efficacy stopping rules on the error rates under the multi-arm multi-stage framework. Blenkinsop A; Parmar MK; Choodari-Oskooei B Clin Trials; 2019 Apr; 16(2):132-141. PubMed ID: 30648428 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Conservative management following closed reduction of traumatic anterior dislocation of the shoulder. Braun C; McRobert CJ Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2019 May; 5(5):CD004962. PubMed ID: 31074847 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Indirect comparisons of competing interventions. Glenny AM; Altman DG; Song F; Sakarovitch C; Deeks JJ; D'Amico R; Bradburn M; Eastwood AJ; Health Technol Assess; 2005 Jul; 9(26):1-134, iii-iv. PubMed ID: 16014203 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Minimum number of clusters and comparison of analysis methods for cross sectional stepped wedge cluster randomised trials with binary outcomes: A simulation study. Barker D; D'Este C; Campbell MJ; McElduff P Trials; 2017 Mar; 18(1):119. PubMed ID: 28279222 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Reducing the risk of bias in health behaviour change trials: improving trial design, reporting or bias assessment criteria? A review and case study. de Bruin M; McCambridge J; Prins JM Psychol Health; 2015 Jan; 30(1):8-34. PubMed ID: 25112431 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomised and non-randomised studies. MacLehose RR; Reeves BC; Harvey IM; Sheldon TA; Russell IT; Black AM Health Technol Assess; 2000; 4(34):1-154. PubMed ID: 11134917 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]