Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Results: 1 to 20 of 129

Similar articles for PubMed (Select 17302989)

1.

Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.

Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, Porter AC, Tugwell P, Moher D, Bouter LM.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007 Feb 15;7:10.

2.

AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.

Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, Bouter LM, Kristjansson E, Grimshaw J, Henry DA, Boers M.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1013-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009. Epub 2009 Feb 20.

PMID:
19230606
3.

From Systematic Reviews to Clinical Recommendations for Evidence-Based Health Care: Validation of Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (R-AMSTAR) for Grading of Clinical Relevance.

Kung J, Chiappelli F, Cajulis OO, Avezova R, Kossan G, Chew L, Maida CA.

Open Dent J. 2010 Jul 16;4:84-91. doi: 10.2174/1874210601004020084.

4.

The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews.

Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003 Nov 10;3:25.

5.

Development and validation of methods for assessing the quality of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Dinnes J, Reitsma J, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J.

Health Technol Assess. 2004 Jun;8(25):iii, 1-234. Review.

6.

[Methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews correlated to traditional Chinese medicine published in China].

Hu D, Kang DY, Wu YX.

Zhongguo Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Za Zhi. 2011 Mar;31(3):402-6. Chinese.

PMID:
21485088
7.

Development of a quality-assessment tool for experimental bruxism studies: reliability and validity.

Dawson A, Raphael KG, Glaros A, Axelsson S, Arima T, Ernberg M, Farella M, Lobbezoo F, Manfredini D, Michelotti A, Svensson P, List T.

J Orofac Pain. 2013 Spring;27(2):111-22. doi: 10.11607/jop.1065.

PMID:
23630683
8.

Systematic reviews explained: AMSTAR-how to tell the good from the bad and the ugly.

Sharif MO, Janjua-Sharif FN, Ali H, Ahmed F.

Oral Health Dent Manag. 2013 Mar;12(1):9-16. Erratum in: Oral Health Dent Manag. 2013 Jun;12(2):119. Sharif, Fyeza N Janjua [corrected to Janjua-Sharif, Fyeza N].

PMID:
23474576
9.

Methodological quality of systematic reviews on influenza vaccination.

Remschmidt C, Wichmann O, Harder T.

Vaccine. 2014 Mar 26;32(15):1678-84. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.01.060. Epub 2014 Feb 7.

PMID:
24513008
10.

Reliability and External Validity of AMSTAR in Assessing Quality of TCM Systematic Reviews.

Kang D, Wu Y, Hu D, Hong Q, Wang J, Zhang X.

Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2012;2012:732195. doi: 10.1155/2012/732195. Epub 2012 Feb 16.

11.

Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist.

Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, Ostelo RW, Bouter LM, de Vet HC.

Qual Life Res. 2012 May;21(4):651-7. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9960-1. Epub 2011 Jul 6.

12.

[Assessment of reliability and validity of assessment of multiple systematic reviews in chinese systematic reviews on stomatology].

Su N, Lü J, Li C, Chen L, Shi Z.

Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2013 Feb;31(1):49-52. Chinese.

13.

Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies.

Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D'Amico R, Sowden AJ, Sakarovitch C, Song F, Petticrew M, Altman DG; International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group; European Carotid Surgery Trial Collaborative Group.

Health Technol Assess. 2003;7(27):iii-x, 1-173. Review.

14.

Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of two different approaches.

Popovich I, Windsor B, Jordan V, Showell M, Shea B, Farquhar CM.

PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e50403. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050403. Epub 2012 Dec 28.

15.

Quality assessment of systematic reviews on periodontal regeneration in humans.

Elangovan S, Avila-Ortiz G, Johnson GK, Karimbux N, Allareddy V.

J Periodontol. 2013 Feb;84(2):176-85. doi: 10.1902/jop.2012.120021. Epub 2012 Apr 17. Review.

PMID:
22509753
16.
17.

External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR).

Shea BJ, Bouter LM, Peterson J, Boers M, Andersson N, Ortiz Z, Ramsay T, Bai A, Shukla VK, Grimshaw JM.

PLoS One. 2007 Dec 26;2(12):e1350.

18.

Quality of systematic reviews in pediatric oncology--a systematic review.

Lundh A, Knijnenburg SL, Jørgensen AW, van Dalen EC, Kremer LC.

Cancer Treat Rev. 2009 Dec;35(8):645-52. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2009.08.010. Review.

PMID:
19836897
19.

Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in assisted reproductive technologies.

Windsor B, Popovich I, Jordan V, Showell M, Shea B, Farquhar C.

Hum Reprod. 2012 Dec;27(12):3460-6. doi: 10.1093/humrep/des342. Epub 2012 Oct 2.

20.

The quality of reports of critical care meta-analyses in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: an independent appraisal.

Delaney A, Bagshaw SM, Ferland A, Laupland K, Manns B, Doig C.

Crit Care Med. 2007 Feb;35(2):589-94.

PMID:
17205029
Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk