Trang chủ

Tài liệu nghiên cứu Y học

Search Journal

Search Article

Search by Auth

Category

From

To

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volume 106, Pages 1-146 (February 2019)

1. Cover 2 Editorial Board

Tác giả

2. Table of Contents

Tác giả

3. Noblesse oblige: critical issues at the highest level of clinical evidence

Tác giả

J. André Knottnerus, Peter Tugwell.

4. Tailored meta-analysis: an investigation of the correlation between the test positive rate and prevalence

Tác giả

Brian H. Willis, Dyuti Coomar, Mohammed Baragilly.

5. In Cochrane reviews, risk of bias assessments for allocation concealment were frequently not in line with Cochrane's Handbook guidance

Tác giả

Ivana Propadalo, Mia Tranfic, Ivana Vuka, Ognjen Barcot, ... Livia Puljak.

6. Potentially missing data are considerably more frequent than definitely missing data: a methodological survey of 638 randomized controlled trials

Tác giả

Lara A. Kahale, Batoul Diab, Assem M. Khamis, Yaping Chang, ... Elie A. Akl.

7. Comparison of alternative falls data collection methods in the Prevention of Falls Injury Trial (PreFIT)

Tác giả

James Griffin, Ranjit Lall, Julie Bruce, Emma Withers, ... Henry Adjei.

8. Borrowing of strength from indirect evidence in 40 network meta-analyses

Tác giả

Lifeng Lin, Aiwen Xing, Michael J. Kofler, Mohammad Hassan Murad.

9. Increased risks for random errors are common in outcomes graded as high certainty of evidence

Tác giả

Gerald Gartlehner, Barbara Nussbaumer-Streit, Gernot Wagner, Sheila Patel, ... Christian Gluud.

10. A data-sharing agreement helps to increase researchers’ willingness to share primary data: results from a randomized controlled trial

Tác giả

Joshua R. Polanin, Mary Terzian.

11. Reporting guidelines on how to write a complete and transparent abstract for overviews of systematic reviews of health care interventions

Tác giả

Konstantinos I. Bougioukas, Emmanouil Bouras, Fani Apostolidou-Kiouti, Stamatia Kokkali, ... Anna-Bettina Haidich.

12. Extremely large outlier treatment effects may be a footprint of bias in trials from less developed countries: randomized trials of gabapentinoids

Tác giả

Karishma Desai, Ian Carroll, Steven Asch, Tina Hernandez-Boussard, John P.A. Ioannidis.

13. Citation bias in the literature on dietary trans fatty acids and serum cholesterol

Tác giả

Miriam J.E. Urlings, Bram Duyx, Gerard M.H. Swaen, Lex M. Bouter, Maurice P.A. Zeegers.

14. Conceptualizing multiple drug use in patients with comorbidity and multimorbidity: proposal for standard definitions beyond the term polypharmacy

Tác giả

Umesh T. Kadam, Isobel Roberts, Simon White, Ruth Bednall, ... Claire A. Lawson.

15. The QuinteT Recruitment Intervention supported five randomized trials to recruit to target: a mixed-methods evaluation

Tác giả

Leila Rooshenas, Lauren J. Scott, Jane M. Blazeby, Chris A. Rogers, ... Tim Wheatley.

16. Few studies exist examining methods for selecting studies, abstracting data, and appraising quality in a systematic review

Tác giả

Reid C. Robson, Ba’ Pham, Jeremiah Hwee, Sonia M. Thomas, ... Andrea C. Tricco.

17. The Delphi method—more research please

Tác giả

Susan Humphrey-Murto, Maarten de Wit.

18. Outcomes that patients perceive and value are systematically unassessed in randomized clinical trials of endocrine-related illnesses: a systematic review

Tác giả

Edgar Gerardo Dorsey-Treviño, Neri Alvarez-Villalobos, José Gerardo González-González, Alejandro Díaz González-Colmenero, ... René Rodriguez-Gutierrez.

19. Don't forget about the “R” in cmRCT: reply to Groenwold and van Smeden

Tác giả

Helena M. Verkooijen, Alice Couwenberg, Anne May, Brett Thombs, ... Merrick Zwarenstein.

20. Comparability of treatment arms does not prevent correlated trial results

Tác giả

Rolf H.H. Groenwold, Maarten van Smeden.

21. Selective outcome reporting is present in randomized controlled trials in lung cancer immunotherapies

Tác giả

Reenika Aggarwal, Mark Oremus.