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 *

138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33753230)

  • 1. A prospective comparison of evidence synthesis search strategies developed with and without text-mining tools.
    Paynter RA; Featherstone R; Stoeger E; Fiordalisi C; Voisin C; Adam GP
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 Nov; 139():350-360. PubMed ID: 33753230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Study filters for non-randomized studies of interventions consistently lacked sensitivity upon external validation.
    Hausner E; Metzendorf MI; Richter B; Lotz F; Waffenschmidt S
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Dec; 18(1):171. PubMed ID: 30563471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. A comparison of metrics and performance characteristics of different search strategies for article retrieval for a systematic review of the global epidemiology of kidney and urinary diseases.
    Bikbov B; Perico N; Remuzzi G;
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Oct; 18(1):110. PubMed ID: 30340535
    [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. Text mining for search term development in systematic reviewing: A discussion of some methods and challenges.
    Stansfield C; O'Mara-Eves A; Thomas J
    Res Synth Methods; 2017 Sep; 8(3):355-365. PubMed ID: 28660680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. The NICE UK geographic search filters for MEDLINE and Embase (Ovid): Post-development study to further evaluate precision and number-needed-to-read when retrieving UK evidence.
    Ayiku L; Levay P; Hudson T; Finnegan A
    Res Synth Methods; 2020 Sep; 11(5):669-677. PubMed ID: 32618106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies.
    Cooper C; Booth A; Varley-Campbell J; Britten N; Garside R
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Aug; 18(1):85. PubMed ID: 30107788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Prospective comparison of search strategies for systematic reviews: an objective approach yielded higher sensitivity than a conceptual one.
    Hausner E; Guddat C; Hermanns T; Lampert U; Waffenschmidt S
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Sep; 77():118-124. PubMed ID: 27256930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Title, abstract, and keyword searching resulted in poor recovery of articles in systematic reviews of epidemiologic practice.
    Penning de Vries BBL; van Smeden M; Rosendaal FR; Groenwold RHH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 May; 121():55-61. PubMed ID: 31982541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Search strategies to identify observational studies in MEDLINE and Embase.
    Li L; Smith HE; Atun R; Tudor Car L
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2019 Mar; 3(3):MR000041. PubMed ID: 30860595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The comparative recall of Google Scholar versus PubMed in identical searches for biomedical systematic reviews: a review of searches used in systematic reviews.
    Bramer WM; Giustini D; Kramer BM; Anderson P
    Syst Rev; 2013 Dec; 2():115. PubMed ID: 24360284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Errors in search strategies were identified by type and frequency.
    Sampson M; McGowan J
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2006 Oct; 59(10):1057-63. PubMed ID: 16980145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Overview: comprehensive and carefully constructed strategies are required when conducting searches for adverse effects data.
    Golder S; Peryer G; Loke YK
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Sep; 113():36-43. PubMed ID: 31150833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The efficiency of database searches for creating systematic reviews was improved by search filters.
    Budhram D; Navarro-Ruan T; Haynes RB
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Mar; 95():1-6. PubMed ID: 29191446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Retrieval of overviews of systematic reviews in MEDLINE was improved by the development of an objectively derived and validated search strategy.
    Lunny C; McKenzie JE; McDonald S
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Jun; 74():107-18. PubMed ID: 26723872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Development of a Web-based repository for sharing biomedical terminology from systematic review searches: a case study.
    Saleh AA; Ratajeski MA; Ladue J
    Med Ref Serv Q; 2014; 33(2):167-78. PubMed ID: 24735266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.