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.
43. Statistical methods for assessing the influence of study characteristics on treatment effects in 'meta-epidemiological' research. Sterne JA; Jüni P; Schulz KF; Altman DG; Bartlett C; Egger M Stat Med; 2002 Jun; 21(11):1513-24. PubMed ID: 12111917 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Reconciling disparate data to determine the right answer: A grounded theory of meta analysts' reasoning in meta-analysis. Chan L; Macdonald ME; Carnevale FA; Steele RJ; Shrier I Res Synth Methods; 2018 Mar; 9(1):25-40. PubMed ID: 28741808 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. The mortality reducing effect of aspirin in colorectal cancer patients: Interpreting the evidence. Frouws MA; van Herk-Sukel MPP; Maas HA; Van de Velde CJH; Portielje JEA; Liefers GJ; Bastiaannet E Cancer Treat Rev; 2017 Apr; 55():120-127. PubMed ID: 28359968 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Publication bias was not a good reason to discourage trials with low power. Borm GF; den Heijer M; Zielhuis GA J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Jan; 62(1):47.e1-10. PubMed ID: 18620841 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. The epidemiology of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) and the weight of evidence argument. Kilpatrick SJ Int Surg; 1992; 77(2):131-3. PubMed ID: 1386592 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Meta-analysis under the spotlight: focused on a meta-analysis of ventilator weaning. Tobin MJ; Jubran A Crit Care Med; 2008 Jan; 36(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 18007269 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. A new risk of bias checklist applicable to randomized trials, observational studies, and systematic reviews was developed and validated to be used for systematic reviews focusing on drug adverse events. Faillie JL; Ferrer P; Gouverneur A; Driot D; Berkemeyer S; Vidal X; Martínez-Zapata MJ; Huerta C; Castells X; Rottenkolber M; Schmiedl S; Sabaté M; Ballarín E; Ibáñez L J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Jun; 86():168-175. PubMed ID: 28487158 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis. Tierney JF; Stewart LA Int J Epidemiol; 2005 Feb; 34(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 15561753 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. A suggestion for quality assessment in systematic reviews of observational studies in nutritional epidemiology. Bae JM Epidemiol Health; 2016; 38():e2016014. PubMed ID: 27156344 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. The robust error meta-regression method for dose-response meta-analysis. Xu C; Doi SAR Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2018 Sep; 16(3):138-144. PubMed ID: 29251651 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Developing the evidence base for cancer chemoprevention: use of meta-analysis. Nikolopoulos GK; Bagos PG; Bonovas S Curr Drug Targets; 2011 Dec; 12(13):1989-97. PubMed ID: 21158703 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Publication bias and dissemination of clinical research. Begg CB; Berlin JA J Natl Cancer Inst; 1989 Jan; 81(2):107-15. PubMed ID: 2642556 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Traditional reviews, meta-analyses and pooled analyses in epidemiology. Blettner M; Sauerbrei W; Schlehofer B; Scheuchenpflug T; Friedenreich C Int J Epidemiol; 1999 Feb; 28(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 10195657 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Meta-analysis: statistical alchemy for the 21st century. Feinstein AR J Clin Epidemiol; 1995 Jan; 48(1):71-9. PubMed ID: 7853050 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
58. Observational evidence. Hennekens CH; Buring JE Ann N Y Acad Sci; 1993 Dec; 703():18-24; discussion 24. PubMed ID: 8192295 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
59. Meta-analysis of the literature or of individual patient data: is there a difference? Stewart LA; Parmar MK Lancet; 1993 Feb; 341(8842):418-22. PubMed ID: 8094183 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]