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 *

164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33002636)

  • 41. [STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF RANDOMISED CLINICAL TRIALS: EVOLVING CHANGES ACCORDING TO PERSONALIZED MEDICINE].
    Ernest P; Jandrain B; Scheen AJ
    Rev Med Liege; 2015; 70(5-6):232-6. PubMed ID: 26285444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. N-of-1 trials are a tapestry of heterogeneity.
    Punja S; Bukutu C; Shamseer L; Sampson M; Hartling L; Urichuk L; Vohra S
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Aug; 76():47-56. PubMed ID: 27079847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. An introduction to an evidence-based approach to interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain.
    Manchikanti L; Singh V; Helm S; Schultz DM; Datta S; Hirsch JA;
    Pain Physician; 2009; 12(4):E1-33. PubMed ID: 19668280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Experience using pragmatic care trials to guide neurovascular practice under uncertainty.
    Darsaut TE; Raymond J
    Neurochirurgie; 2020 Dec; 66(6):423-428. PubMed ID: 33049287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Are trials of psychological and psychosocial interventions for schizophrenia and psychosis included in the NICE guidelines pragmatic? A systematic review.
    Gastaldon C; Mosler F; Toner S; Tedeschi F; Bird VJ; Barbui C; Priebe S
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(9):e0222891. PubMed ID: 31550279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Patient preferences for personalized (N-of-1) trials: a conjoint analysis.
    Moise N; Wood D; Cheung YKK; Duan N; Onge TS; Duer-Hefele J; Pu T; Davidson KW; Kronish IM;
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Oct; 102():12-22. PubMed ID: 29859242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. From decision to shared-decision: Introducing patients' preferences into clinical decision analysis.
    Sacchi L; Rubrichi S; Rognoni C; Panzarasa S; Parimbelli E; Mazzanti A; Napolitano C; Priori SG; Quaglini S
    Artif Intell Med; 2015 Sep; 65(1):19-28. PubMed ID: 25455562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Oversight on the borderline: Quality improvement and pragmatic research.
    Finkelstein JA; Brickman AL; Capron A; Ford DE; Gombosev A; Greene SM; Iafrate RP; Kolaczkowski L; Pallin SC; Pletcher MJ; Staman KL; Vazquez MA; Sugarman J
    Clin Trials; 2015 Oct; 12(5):457-66. PubMed ID: 26374685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Needs and preferences of patients regarding basal cell carcinoma and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma care: a qualitative focus group study.
    van Egmond S; Wakkee M; Droger M; Bastiaens MT; van Rengen A; de Roos KP; Nijsten T; Lugtenberg M
    Br J Dermatol; 2019 Jan; 180(1):122-129. PubMed ID: 29927480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Improving the relevance of randomised trials to primary care: a qualitative study investigating views towards pragmatic trials and the PRECIS-2 tool.
    Forbes G; Loudon K; Clinch M; Taylor SJC; Treweek S; Eldridge S
    Trials; 2019 Dec; 20(1):711. PubMed ID: 31829266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Considerations in the evaluation and determination of minimal risk in pragmatic clinical trials.
    Lantos JD; Wendler D; Septimus E; Wahba S; Madigan R; Bliss G
    Clin Trials; 2015 Oct; 12(5):485-93. PubMed ID: 26374686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Quality and strength: the GRADE system for formulating recommendations in clinical practice guidelines.
    Alonso-Coello P; Rigau D; Sanabria AJ; Plaza V; Miravitlles M; Martinez L
    Arch Bronconeumol; 2013 Jun; 49(6):261-7. PubMed ID: 23434203
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Evidence-based alternative medicine?
    Borgerson K
    Perspect Biol Med; 2005; 48(4):502-15. PubMed ID: 16227663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Learning from the past: refining the way we study treatments.
    Viechtbauer W
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Sep; 63(9):980-2. PubMed ID: 20573485
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Evidence-Based Review of Clinical Trials in Neurocritical Care.
    McNett M; Moran C; Johnson H
    AACN Adv Crit Care; 2018; 29(2):195-203. PubMed ID: 29875116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Bayesian Analysis: A Practical Approach to Interpret Clinical Trials and Create Clinical Practice Guidelines.
    Bittl JA; He Y
    Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes; 2017 Aug; 10(8):. PubMed ID: 28798016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Limitations of evidence in the practice of evidence-based medicine.
    Howland RH
    J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv; 2007 Nov; 45(11):13-6. PubMed ID: 18041353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Point-of-Care Clinical Trials in Sports Medicine Research: Identifying Effective Treatment Interventions Through Comparative Effectiveness Research.
    Lam KC; Bacon CEW; Sauers EL; Bay RC
    J Athl Train; 2020 Mar; 55(3):217-228. PubMed ID: 31618071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. [Evidence based medicine for the gastroenterologist].
    Curioso WH; Montori VM; Curioso WI
    Rev Gastroenterol Peru; 2004; 24(1):75-91. PubMed ID: 15098043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Quadruple Decision Making for Parkinson's Disease Patients: Combining Expert Opinion, Patient Preferences, Scientific Evidence, and Big Data Approaches to Reach Precision Medicine.
    van den Heuvel L; Dorsey RR; Prainsack B; Post B; Stiggelbout AM; Meinders MJ; Bloem BR
    J Parkinsons Dis; 2020; 10(1):223-231. PubMed ID: 31561387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.