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 *

188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34444374)

  • 1. Selecting Risk of Bias Tools for Observational Studies for a Systematic Review of Anthropometric Measurements and Dental Caries among Children.
    Mamikutty R; Aly AS; Marhazlinda J
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2021 Aug; 18(16):. PubMed ID: 34444374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
    Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Inter-rater reliability and validity of risk of bias instrument for non-randomized studies of exposures: a study protocol.
    Jeyaraman MM; Al-Yousif N; Robson RC; Copstein L; Balijepalli C; Hofer K; Fazeli MS; Ansari MT; Tricco AC; Rabbani R; Abou-Setta AM
    Syst Rev; 2020 Feb; 9(1):32. PubMed ID: 32051035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessor burden, inter-rater agreement and user experience of the RoB-SPEO tool for assessing risk of bias in studies estimating prevalence of exposure to occupational risk factors: An analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.
    Momen NC; Streicher KN; da Silva DTC; Descatha A; Frings-Dresen MHW; Gagliardi D; Godderis L; Loney T; Mandrioli D; Modenese A; Morgan RL; Pachito D; Scheepers PTJ; Sgargi D; Paulo MS; Schlünssen V; Sembajwe G; Sørensen K; Teixeira LR; Tenkate T; Pega F
    Environ Int; 2022 Jan; 158():107005. PubMed ID: 34991265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Inter-rater reliability of risk of bias tools for non-randomized studies.
    Kalaycioglu I; Rioux B; Briard JN; Nehme A; Touma L; Dansereau B; Veilleux-Carpentier A; Keezer MR
    Syst Rev; 2023 Dec; 12(1):227. PubMed ID: 38057883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity of ROBINS-I: protocol for a cross-sectional study.
    Jeyaraman MM; Rabbani R; Al-Yousif N; Robson RC; Copstein L; Xia J; Pollock M; Mansour S; Ansari MT; Tricco AC; Abou-Setta AM
    Syst Rev; 2020 Jan; 9(1):12. PubMed ID: 31931871
    [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. Tool to assess risk of bias in studies estimating the prevalence of mental health disorders (RoB-PrevMH).
    Tonia T; Buitrago-Garcia D; Peter NL; Mesa-Vieira C; Li T; Furukawa TA; Cipriani A; Leucht S; Low N; Salanti G
    BMJ Ment Health; 2023 Oct; 26(1):. PubMed ID: 37899074
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. RoB-SPEO: A tool for assessing risk of bias in studies estimating the prevalence of exposure to occupational risk factors from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.
    Pega F; Norris SL; Backes C; Bero LA; Descatha A; Gagliardi D; Godderis L; Loney T; Modenese A; Morgan RL; Pachito D; Paulo MBS; Scheepers PTJ; Schlünssen V; Sgargi D; Silbergeld EK; Sørensen K; Sutton P; Tenkate T; Torreão Corrêa da Silva D; Ujita Y; van Deventer E; Woodruff TJ; Mandrioli D
    Environ Int; 2020 Feb; 135():105039. PubMed ID: 31864023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A scoping review shows that no single existing risk of bias assessment tool considers all sources of bias for cross-sectional studies.
    Kelly SE; Brooks SPJ; Benkhedda K; MacFarlane AJ; Greene-Finestone LS; Skidmore B; Clifford TJ; Wells GA
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2024 Jun; 172():111408. PubMed ID: 38844117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Risk of bias tools in systematic reviews of health interventions: an analysis of PROSPERO-registered protocols.
    Farrah K; Young K; Tunis MC; Zhao L
    Syst Rev; 2019 Nov; 8(1):280. PubMed ID: 31730014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Assessing risk of bias in human environmental epidemiology studies using three tools: different conclusions from different tools.
    Eick SM; Goin DE; Chartres N; Lam J; Woodruff TJ
    Syst Rev; 2020 Oct; 9(1):249. PubMed ID: 33121530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews of Non-Randomized Studies of Adverse Cardiovascular Effects of Thiazolidinediones and Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors: Application of a New Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.
    Bilandzic A; Fitzpatrick T; Rosella L; Henry D
    PLoS Med; 2016 Apr; 13(4):e1001987. PubMed ID: 27046153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A tool to assess risk of bias in studies estimating the prevalence of mental health disorders (RoB-PrevMH).
    Tonia T; Buitrago-Garcia D; Peter N; Mesa-Vieira C; Li T; Furukawa TA; Cipriani A; Leucht S; Low N; Salanti G
    medRxiv; 2023 Feb; ():. PubMed ID: 36778304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Inter-Rater Agreement in Assessing Risk of Bias in Melanoma Prediction Studies Using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST): Results from a Controlled Experiment on the Effect of Specific Rater Training.
    Kaiser I; Pfahlberg AB; Mathes S; Uter W; Diehl K; Steeb T; Heppt MV; Gefeller O
    J Clin Med; 2023 Mar; 12(5):. PubMed ID: 36902763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Methodological tools and sensitivity analysis for assessing quality or risk of bias used in systematic reviews published in the high-impact anesthesiology journals.
    Marušić MF; Fidahić M; Cepeha CM; Farcaș LG; Tseke A; Puljak L
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 May; 20(1):121. PubMed ID: 32423382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Methodological quality and risk of bias in orthodontic systematic reviews using AMSTAR and ROBIS.
    Hooper EJ; Pandis N; Cobourne MT; Seehra J
    Eur J Orthod; 2021 Oct; 43(5):544-550. PubMed ID: 33723612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Risk of bias in cross-sectional studies: Protocol for a scoping review of concepts and tools.
    Kelly SE; Benkhedda K; Brooks SPJ; MacFarlane AJ; Greene-Finestone LS; Skidmore B; Clifford TJ; Wells GA
    MethodsX; 2024 Jun; 12():102610. PubMed ID: 38371462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews: a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool: methodological research.
    Armijo-Olivo S; Stiles CR; Hagen NA; Biondo PD; Cummings GG
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2012 Feb; 18(1):12-8. PubMed ID: 20698919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.