Trang chủ
Tài liệu nghiên cứu Y học
Search Journal
Search Article
Search by Auth
Category
All Category
Biomedicine
Biochem,Gene&Molecular Biology
Computer Science
Public Health
Medicine & Public Health
Medicine Public Health
Immunology and Microbiology
From
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
To
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Last issue
All issues
All articles
Search
Volume 115, Pages A1-A10, 1-182 (November 2019)
Previous vol/issue
Next vol/issue
1. Cover 2 Editorial Board
Download PDF
Tác giả
2. Table of Contents
Download PDF
Tác giả
3. Can university medical center trial investigators do more to ensure timely publication of clinical trial results?
Download PDF
Tác giả
4. Development of the summary of findings table for network meta-analysis
Download PDF
Tác giả
Juan José Yepes-Nuñez, Shelly-Anne Li, Gordon Guyatt, Susan M. Jack, Holger J. Schünemann.
5. A systematic review of core outcome set development studies demonstrates difficulties in defining unique outcomes
Download PDF
Tác giả
Amber E. Young, Sara T. Brookes, Kerry N.L. Avery, Anna Davies, Jane M. Blazeby.
6. Statistical significance did not affect time to publication in non-Cochrane systematic reviews: a metaepidemiological study
Download PDF
Tác giả
Yasushi Tsujimoto, Yusuke Tsutsumi, Yuki Kataoka, Hiraku Tsujimoto, Toshi A. Furukawa.
7. Registration of methodological studies, that is, “research-on-research” studies—should it be mandatory?
Download PDF
Tác giả
Livia Puljak, Dawid Pieper.
8. Result dissemination from clinical trials conducted at German university medical centers was delayed and incomplete
Download PDF
Tác giả
Susanne Wieschowski, Nico Riedel, Katharina Wollmann, Hannes Kahrass, Daniel Strech.
9. Meta-analyses indexed in PsycINFO had a better completeness of reporting when they mention PRISMA
Download PDF
Tác giả
Victoria Leclercq, Charlotte Beaudart, Sara Ajamieh, Véronique Rabenda, Olivier Bruyère.
10. A guidance was developed to identify participants with missing outcome data in randomized controlled trials
Download PDF
Tác giả
Lara A. Kahale, Gordon H. Guyatt, Thomas Agoritsas, Matthias Briel, Elie A. Akl.
11. Contacting of authors modified crucial outcomes of systematic reviews but was poorly reported, not systematic, and produced conflicting results
Download PDF
Tác giả
Reint Meursinge Reynders, Luisa Ladu, Nicola Di Girolamo.
12. A randomized trial provided new evidence on the accuracy and efficiency of traditional vs. electronically annotated abstraction approaches in systematic reviews
Download PDF
Tác giả
Tianjing Li, Ian J. Saldanha, Jens Jap, Bryant T. Smith, Christopher H. Schmid.
13. Industry funding was associated with increased use of core outcome sets
Download PDF
Tác giả
Jamie J. Kirkham, Megan Bracken, Lorna Hind, Katie Pennington, Paula R. Williamson.
14. The use of rigorous methods was strongly warranted among prognostic prediction models for obstetric care
Download PDF
Tác giả
Jing Tan, Yana Qi, Chunrong Liu, Yiquan Xiong, Xin Sun.
15. Decision analytic modeling was useful to assess the impact of a prediction model on health outcomes before a randomized trial
Download PDF
Tác giả
Kevin Jenniskens, Ghizelda R. Lagerweij, Christiana A. Naaktgeboren, Lotty Hooft, Johannes B. Reitsma.
16. PROMIS 4-item measures and numeric rating scales efficiently assess SPADE symptoms compared with legacy measures
Download PDF
Tác giả
Kurt Kroenke, Timothy E. Stump, Jacob Kean, Tasneem L. Talib, Patrick O. Monahan.
17. Identifying compliant participants through data matching improved estimation of intervention efficacy: randomized trials with opt-in/opt-out strategies
Download PDF
Tác giả
Shu Kay Ng, Joshua Byrnes, Paul Scuffham.
18. Reporting quality and statistical analysis of published dose-response meta-analyses was suboptimal: a cross-sectional literature survey
Download PDF
Tác giả
Qingqing Jiang, Qiaoyan Liu, Fan Chen, Xiantao Zeng, Shiyi Cao.
19. A systematic review describes models for recruitment prediction at the design stage of a clinical trial
Download PDF
Tác giả
Efstathia Gkioni, Roser Rius, Susanna Dodd, Carrol Gamble.
20. Contacting authors by telephone increased response proportions compared with emailing: results of a randomized study
Download PDF
Tác giả
Kristin J. Danko, Issa J. Dahabreh, Noah M. Ivers, David Moher, Jeremy M. Grimshaw.
21. A scoping review found increasing examples of rapid qualitative evidence syntheses and no methodological guidance
Download PDF
Tác giả
Fiona Campbell, Laura Weeks, Andrew Booth, David Kaunelis, Andrea Smith.
22. Letter re: stratification by quality is not recommended in meta-analysis
Download PDF
Tác giả
Jennifer Stone, Usha Gurunathan, Kathryn Glass, Zachary Munn, Suhail A.R. Doi.
23. Letter re: stratification of meta-analyses based on risk of bias is appropriate and does not induce selection bias
Download PDF
Tác giả
Matthew J. Page, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Camilla Hansen, Jonathan A.C. Sterne.
24. Hawthorne effect in the YourCall trial suggested by participants’ qualitative responses
Download PDF
Tác giả
Sarah Sharpe, Bridget Kool, Robyn Whittaker, Shanthi Ameratunga.
25. The reply to Sharpe et al.: Hawthorne effect in the YourCall trial suggested by participants qualitative responses
Download PDF
Tác giả
Jim McCambridge, Amanda Wilson, John Attia, Natasha Weaver, Kypros Kypri.
