154 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38863985)
21. Risk of bias in observational studies using routinely collected data of comparative effectiveness research: a meta-research study.
Nguyen VT; Engleton M; Davison M; Ravaud P; Porcher R; Boutron I
BMC Med; 2021 Nov; 19(1):279. PubMed ID: 34809637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: approaches to mitigate bias and confounding in the design of nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report--Part II.
Cox E; Martin BC; Van Staa T; Garbe E; Siebert U; Johnson ML
Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1053-61. PubMed ID: 19744292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Implementation of the trial emulation approach in medical research: a scoping review.
Scola G; Chis Ster A; Bean D; Pareek N; Emsley R; Landau S
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2023 Aug; 23(1):186. PubMed ID: 37587484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Pitfalls in scientific research: critical appraisal of articles published in one of the international journals in Egypt.
Nasr SS; Sherif GM; Ibrahim AS; Allam RM
J Egypt Natl Canc Inst; 2020 Oct; 32(1):39. PubMed ID: 33103205
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Conveying Equipoise during Recruitment for Clinical Trials: Qualitative Synthesis of Clinicians' Practices across Six Randomised Controlled Trials.
Rooshenas L; Elliott D; Wade J; Jepson M; Paramasivan S; Strong S; Wilson C; Beard D; Blazeby JM; Birtle A; Halliday A; Rogers CA; Stein R; Donovan JL; ; ; ; ; ;
PLoS Med; 2016 Oct; 13(10):e1002147. PubMed ID: 27755555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Interpretation of tests of heterogeneity and bias in meta-analysis.
Ioannidis JP
J Eval Clin Pract; 2008 Oct; 14(5):951-7. PubMed ID: 19018930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Navigating PROSPERO4animals: 10 top tips for efficient pre-registration of your animal systematic review protocol.
Bannach-Brown A; Rackoll T; Kaynak N; Drude N; Aquarius R; Vojvodić S; Abreu M; Menon JML; Wever KE
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2024 Jan; 24(1):20. PubMed ID: 38267888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Credibility at stake: only two-thirds of randomized trials of nutrition interventions are registered and lack transparency in outcome and treatment effect definitions.
Mello AT; Kammer PV; Nascimento GM; de Lima LP; Pessini J; Valmorbida A; Page MJ; Trindade EBSM
J Clin Epidemiol; 2023 Sep; 161():74-83. PubMed ID: 37399969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.
Allen EN; Chandler CI; Mandimika N; Leisegang C; Barnes K
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2018 Jan; 1(1):MR000039. PubMed ID: 29372930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Avoiding practice-based research pitfalls: one novice's experience.
Day TW
Fam Pract Res J; 1994 Jun; 14(2):197-204. PubMed ID: 8053385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Pitfalls in Study Interpretation.
Gelbard RB; Cripps MW
Surg Infect (Larchmt); 2021 Aug; 22(6):646-650. PubMed ID: 34270363
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Analysis of observational studies: a guide to understanding statistical methods.
Morshed S; Tornetta P; Bhandari M
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2009 May; 91 Suppl 3():50-60. PubMed ID: 19411500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Statistical pitfalls in medical research.
Nyirongo VB; Mukaka MM; Kalilani-Phiri LV
Malawi Med J; 2008 Mar; 20(1):15-8. PubMed ID: 19260441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.
Manchikanti L; Datta S; Smith HS; Hirsch JA
Pain Physician; 2009; 12(5):819-50. PubMed ID: 19787009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Incorporation of patient and public involvement in statistical methodology research: a survey assessing current practices and attitudes of researchers.
Abell L; Maher F; Begum S; Booth S; Broomfield J; Lee S; Smith E; Stannard R; Teece L; Vounzoulaki E; Worboys H; Gray LJ
Res Involv Engagem; 2023 Oct; 9(1):100. PubMed ID: 37891693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Toward a better understanding about real-world evidence.
Liu M; Qi Y; Wang W; Sun X
Eur J Hosp Pharm; 2022 Jan; 29(1):8-11. PubMed ID: 34857642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Use of appropriate statistical tools in biomedical research: Current trend & status.
Kumar A; Kishun J; Singh U; Gaur D; Mishra P; Pandey CM
Indian J Med Res; 2023 Apr; 157(4):353-357. PubMed ID: 37282397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Reporting of methodological studies in health research: a protocol for the development of the MethodologIcal STudy reportIng Checklist (MISTIC).
Lawson DO; Puljak L; Pieper D; Schandelmaier S; Collins GS; Brignardello-Petersen R; Moher D; Tugwell P; Welch VA; Samaan Z; Thombs BD; Nørskov AK; Jakobsen JC; Allison DB; Mayo-Wilson E; Young T; Chan AW; Briel M; Guyatt GH; Thabane L; Mbuagbaw L
BMJ Open; 2020 Dec; 10(12):e040478. PubMed ID: 33334836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Regulatory considerations in the design of comparative observational studies using propensity scores.
Yue LQ
J Biopharm Stat; 2012; 22(6):1272-9. PubMed ID: 23075022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
