Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 116

1.

Judging the quality of evidence in reviews of prognostic factor research: adapting the GRADE framework.

Huguet A, Hayden JA, Stinson J, McGrath PJ, Chambers CT, Tougas ME, Wozney L.

Syst Rev. 2013 Sep 5;2:71. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-2-71.

2.

Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: methodological approaches to evaluate the literature and establish best evidence.

Skelly AC, Hashimoto RE, Norvell DC, Dettori JR, Fischer DJ, Wilson JR, Tetreault LA, Fehlings MG.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Oct 15;38(22 Suppl 1):S9-18. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a7ebbf.

PMID:
24026148
3.

Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable.

Gopalakrishna G, Mustafa RA, Davenport C, Scholten RJ, Hyde C, Brozek J, Schünemann HJ, Bossuyt PM, Leeflang MM, Langendam MW.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Jul;67(7):760-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.01.006. Epub 2014 Apr 13.

4.

Evaluation of the quality of prognosis studies in systematic reviews.

Hayden JA, Côté P, Bombardier C.

Ann Intern Med. 2006 Mar 21;144(6):427-37.

PMID:
16549855
5.

Synthesis, grading, and presentation of evidence in guidelines: article 7 in Integrating and coordinating efforts in COPD guideline development. An official ATS/ERS workshop report.

Guyatt G, Akl EA, Oxman A, Wilson K, Puhan MA, Wilt T, Gutterman D, Woodhead M, Antman EM, Schünemann HJ; ATS/ERS Ad Hoc Committee on Integrating and Coordinating Efforts in COPD Guideline Development.

Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2012 Dec;9(5):256-61. doi: 10.1513/pats.201208-060ST. Review.

PMID:
23256168
6.

Conclusiveness resolves the conflict between quality of evidence and imprecision in GRADE.

Anttila S, Persson J, Vareman N, Sahlin NE.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jul;75:1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.03.019. Epub 2016 Apr 5.

7.

Conducting systematic reviews of association (etiology): The Joanna Briggs Institute's approach.

Moola S, Munn Z, Sears K, Sfetcu R, Currie M, Lisy K, Tufanaru C, Qureshi R, Mattis P, Mu P.

Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015 Sep;13(3):163-9. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000064.

PMID:
26262566
8.

Using GRADE for evaluating the quality of evidence in hyperbaric oxygen therapy clarifies evidence limitations.

Murad MH, Altayar O, Bennett M, Wei JC, Claus PL, Asi N, Prokop LJ, Montori VM, Guyatt GH.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Jan;67(1):65-72. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.08.004. Epub 2013 Nov 1. Review. Erratum in: J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Oct;67(10):1178.

PMID:
24189086
9.

GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables.

Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, Norris S, Falck-Ytter Y, Glasziou P, DeBeer H, Jaeschke R, Rind D, Meerpohl J, Dahm P, Schünemann HJ.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Apr;64(4):383-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026. Epub 2010 Dec 31.

PMID:
21195583
10.
11.

The Quality of the Evidence According to GRADE Is Predominantly Low or Very Low in Oral Health Systematic Reviews.

Pandis N, Fleming PS, Worthington H, Salanti G.

PLoS One. 2015 Jul 10;10(7):e0131644. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131644. eCollection 2015.

12.

Interpreting GRADE's levels of certainty or quality of the evidence: GRADE for statisticians, considering review information size or less emphasis on imprecision?

Schünemann HJ.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jul;75:6-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.03.018. Epub 2016 Apr 6.

PMID:
27063205
13.

Summarizing systematic reviews: methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach.

Aromataris E, Fernandez R, Godfrey CM, Holly C, Khalil H, Tungpunkom P.

Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015 Sep;13(3):132-40. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000055.

PMID:
26360830
14.

Conducting systematic reviews of economic evaluations.

Gomersall JS, Jadotte YT, Xue Y, Lockwood S, Riddle D, Preda A.

Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015 Sep;13(3):170-8. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000063.

PMID:
26288063
15.

Association between pacifier use and breast-feeding, sudden infant death syndrome, infection and dental malocclusion.

Callaghan A, Kendall G, Lock C, Mahony A, Payne J, Verrier L.

Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2005 Jul;3(6):147-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-6988.2005.00024.x.

PMID:
21631747
16.

Development of a framework to identify research gaps from systematic reviews.

Robinson KA, Saldanha IJ, McKoy NA.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Dec;64(12):1325-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.06.009. Epub 2011 Sep 19. Review.

PMID:
21937195
17.

Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in the orthopaedic literature.

Gagnier JJ, Kellam PJ.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Jun 5;95(11):e771-7. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00597.

PMID:
23780547
18.

Quality assessment of qualitative evidence for systematic review and synthesis: Is it meaningful, and if so, how should it be performed?

Carroll C, Booth A.

Res Synth Methods. 2015 Jun;6(2):149-54. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1128. Epub 2014 Oct 2. Review.

PMID:
26099483
19.

Challenges in systematic reviews that assess treatment harms.

Chou R, Helfand M.

Ann Intern Med. 2005 Jun 21;142(12 Pt 2):1090-9. Review.

PMID:
15968034
20.

An analysis of quality of systematic reviews on pharmacist health interventions.

Melchiors AC, Correr CJ, Venson R, Pontarolo R.

Int J Clin Pharm. 2012 Feb;34(1):32-42. doi: 10.1007/s11096-011-9592-0. Epub 2011 Dec 20. Review.

PMID:
22183578

Supplemental Content

Support Center