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.
219 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33485394)
1. Considerations for conducting systematic reviews: evaluating the performance of different methods for de-duplicating references. McKeown S; Mir ZM Syst Rev; 2021 Jan; 10(1):38. PubMed ID: 33485394 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia. Osborne SR; Alston LV; Bolton KA; Whelan J; Reeve E; Wong Shee A; Browne J; Walker T; Versace VL; Allender S; Nichols M; Backholer K; Goodwin N; Lewis S; Dalton H; Prael G; Curtin M; Brooks R; Verdon S; Crockett J; Hodgins G; Walsh S; Lyle DM; Thompson SC; Browne LJ; Knight S; Pit SW; Jones M; Gillam MH; Leach MJ; Gonzalez-Chica DA; Muyambi K; Eshetie T; Tran K; May E; Lieschke G; Parker V; Smith A; Hayes C; Dunlop AJ; Rajappa H; White R; Oakley P; Holliday S Med J Aust; 2020 Dec; 213 Suppl 11():S3-S32.e1. PubMed ID: 33314144 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Considerations for conducting systematic reviews: A follow-up study to evaluate the performance of various automated methods for reference de-duplication. McKeown S; Mir ZM Res Synth Methods; 2024 Nov; 15(6):896-904. PubMed ID: 39051574 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cochrane Centralised Search Service showed high sensitivity identifying randomized controlled trials: A retrospective analysis. Noel-Storr AH; Dooley G; Wisniewski S; Glanville J; Thomas J; Cox S; Featherstone R; Foxlee R J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Nov; 127():142-150. PubMed ID: 32798713 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Search strategies to identify diagnostic accuracy studies in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Beynon R; Leeflang MM; McDonald S; Eisinga A; Mitchell RL; Whiting P; Glanville JM Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2013 Sep; 2013(9):MR000022. PubMed ID: 24022476 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Searching Embase and MEDLINE by using only major descriptors or title and abstract fields: a prospective exploratory study. Bramer WM; Giustini D; Kleijnen J; Franco OH Syst Rev; 2018 Nov; 7(1):200. PubMed ID: 30458825 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Optimizing literature search in systematic reviews - are MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL enough for identifying effect studies within the area of musculoskeletal disorders? Aagaard T; Lund H; Juhl C BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Nov; 16(1):161. PubMed ID: 27875992 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study. Bramer WM; Rethlefsen ML; Kleijnen J; Franco OH Syst Rev; 2017 Dec; 6(1):245. PubMed ID: 29208034 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Deduplicating records in systematic reviews: there are free, accurate automated ways to do so. GuimarĂ£es NS; Ferreira AJF; Ribeiro Silva RC; de Paula AA; Lisboa CS; Magno L; Ichiara MY; Barreto ML J Clin Epidemiol; 2022 Dec; 152():110-115. PubMed ID: 36241035 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Better duplicate detection for systematic reviewers: evaluation of Systematic Review Assistant-Deduplication Module. Rathbone J; Carter M; Hoffmann T; Glasziou P Syst Rev; 2015 Jan; 4(1):6. PubMed ID: 25588387 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Beyond Medline: reducing bias through extended systematic review search. Savoie I; Helmer D; Green CJ; Kazanjian A Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2003; 19(1):168-78. PubMed ID: 12701949 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Database selection and data gathering methods in systematic reviews of qualitative research regarding diabetes mellitus - an explorative study. Justesen T; Freyberg J; Schultz ANĂ˜ BMC Med Res Methodol; 2021 Apr; 21(1):94. PubMed ID: 33941105 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Systematic review and modelling of the cost-effectiveness of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging compared with current existing testing pathways in ischaemic cardiomyopathy. Campbell F; Thokala P; Uttley LC; Sutton A; Sutton AJ; Al-Mohammad A; Thomas SM Health Technol Assess; 2014 Sep; 18(59):1-120. PubMed ID: 25265259 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Identifying and removing duplicate records from systematic review searches. Kwon Y; Lemieux M; McTavish J; Wathen N J Med Libr Assoc; 2015 Oct; 103(4):184-8. PubMed ID: 26512216 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of searches for 120 systematic reviews in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar: a prospective study. Bramer WM; Giustini D; Kramer BM Syst Rev; 2016 Mar; 5():39. PubMed ID: 26932789 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Locating systematic reviews of test accuracy studies: how five specialist review databases measure up. Bayliss SE; Davenport C Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2008; 24(4):403-11. PubMed ID: 18828934 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Searches for randomized controlled trials of drugs in MEDLINE and EMBASE using only generic drug names compared with searches applied in current practice in systematic reviews. Waffenschmidt S; Guddat C Res Synth Methods; 2015 Jun; 6(2):188-94. PubMed ID: 26099486 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]