Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
about
The use of systematic reviews and other research evidence in disasters and related areas: preliminary report of a needs assessment surveyPreferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statementEstablishing a new journal for systematic review productsLiving systematic reviews: an emerging opportunity to narrow the evidence-practice gapWhy do we need Evidence-Based Methods in Cochrane?Is The Cochrane Collaboration Prepared for the Era of Patient-Centred Outcomes Research?Interventions to improve the use of systematic reviews in decision-making by health system managers, policy makers and cliniciansInterventions for improving upper limb function after strokeInterventions to improve the use of systematic reviews for clinical and commissioning decision-makingA comparison of statistical methods for identifying out-of-date systematic reviewsToward modernizing the systematic review pipeline in genetics: efficient updating via data miningSystematic reviews and health policy: the influence of a project on perinatal care since 1988Intervention Component Analysis (ICA): a pragmatic approach for identifying the critical features of complex interventionsReality of evidence-based practice in palliative careThe evidence on surgical interventions for low back disorders, an overview of systematic reviewsHarnessing implementation science to improve care quality and patient safety: a systematic review of targeted literatureSensitivity and predictive value of 15 PubMed search strategies to answer clinical questions rated against full systematic reviewsEvidence gaps in ENT surgery - a qualitative surveyImplementation of study results in guidelines and adherence to guidelines in clinical practiceWhat is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and productsAutomating data extraction in systematic reviews: a systematic reviewThe evidence base for interventions delivered to children in primary care: an overview of cochrane systematic reviewsThe citation of relevant systematic reviews and randomised trials in published reports of trial protocolsA Prototype for a Hybrid System to Support Systematic Review Teams: A Case Study of Organ TransplantationImpact of Open Data Policies on Consent to Participate in Human Subjects Research: Discrepancies between Participant Action and Reported ConcernsModern medicine comes online: How putting Wikipedia articles through a medical journal's traditional process can put free, reliable information into as many hands as possibleBeyond information retrieval and electronic health record use: competencies in clinical informatics for medical educationTen simple rules for writing a literature reviewEBMPracticeNet: A Bilingual National Electronic Point-Of-Care Project for Retrieval of Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline Information and Decision SupportScientific value of systematic reviews: survey of editors of core clinical journalsPrioritisation of clinical research by the example of type 2 diabetes: a caregiver-survey on perceived relevance and need for evidenceImpact of searching clinical trial registries in systematic reviews of pharmaceutical treatments: methodological systematic review and reanalysis of meta-analysesEfficacy of Non-Pharmacological Interventions to Prevent and Treat Delirium in Older Patients: A Systematic Overview. The SENATOR project ONTOP SeriesEvidence-based medicine meets person-centred care: a collaborative perspective on the relationship.A systematic review of pediatric clinical trials of high dose vitamin D.Open-access evidence database of controlled trials and systematic reviews in youth mental health.Global collaborative networks on meta-analyses of randomized trials published in high impact factor medical journals: a social network analysis.Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials.Title and Abstract Screening and Evaluation in Systematic Reviews (TASER): a pilot randomised controlled trial of title and abstract screening by medical students.Recent meta-analyses neglect previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses about the same topic: a systematic examination.
P2860
Q21128650-90A75C5D-83FC-483A-90C8-D33D02609109Q21195843-B9B254F9-61CA-4920-B1EB-3F772A622A86Q21195846-BD9FC078-2480-4705-BD43-EA965ABE3FE7Q23048188-33FD70AB-9B55-49D1-81BA-B3C0B1BFAE06Q24188293-B31E4B91-64DA-4B18-9270-EE9E7104BFD9Q24198230-3DA91E60-B0B2-46D5-9129-8228EDA8981BQ24200884-EC964A7B-DC67-49F8-B5D4-176611B9D047Q24202813-A0AE867E-8B6E-4D64-A7D6-49CE9ADAEB0CQ24236689-AFB4A3AD-9B03-45BD-91DC-A12CA5E17AC4Q24288705-12E6AEC2-1A40-42C2-9F59-1F7789FEABFBQ24289349-D806F6EE-0DC0-45A1-A8F5-385AC6CB0133Q24629050-0ABA168F-6074-45D5-AD79-100B4469E5F3Q26777945-35D3EB3A-70FF-4CD7-AA4C-C1377987E403Q26778797-5CA9D8B3-B38E-43E8-8994-C2D263C2557BQ26822782-D3CF8F29-5A72-4938-BA59-116C4A3C8367Q26824770-73451D2F-6C4E-4C52-A38F-8EF3F09A8574Q26866297-E04C8B3F-CFCF-4933-BE27-1274A9B31007Q28071843-BBC23FBD-47F2-4EAB-93A4-D54BDB7242C1Q28078079-AA8D562B-E08F-494D-BF62-0CA63476A315Q28078291-71F8BDCD-50B3-45F0-8843-67E4CF6FF6A0Q28085128-A95EC72C-68C8-4942-BAB5-1AC5B5B9E252Q28476394-5D0F6892-4ED2-48C9-AF36-A818C457EA28Q28588953-AB268C19-123E-45B1-B61A-8B57C4C88D2BQ28601313-D26CEB92-0445-456C-A2F7-40626EFB8647Q28647222-60795A2D-79DD-417B-A006-7A12E95BA4E1Q28651503-89621FC2-C59F-4AF5-A536-86B8426CCC13Q28656039-3D1BF5A5-3841-4B35-BB11-14C4A377EC53Q28677036-D4F28232-8E92-47DF-A234-F72B5ECB1407Q28677108-5EB05F0F-DEDF-47D5-A4AD-64945E608CB8Q28730181-275087E1-C116-4FDF-A0F6-80931E3BAA9BQ28731033-A0E4FE80-6C29-4974-9962-6B6CF5E4A632Q30235881-C8EB2665-9E70-4D6F-859E-85E7435479BCQ30375518-0335F574-340B-4766-AD9E-1FD3B48E70F4Q30379048-9520C5B2-1725-486B-A3D8-391AB4B5565DQ30489069-A5EB4551-3ABD-4A57-A0E8-62E8752A2185Q30491645-D911ECC2-E539-4CF4-B633-8B1692B9D55DQ30570778-62A8D83A-54FA-4FC1-9150-B4CE0D228BA6Q30588271-7BC0CEA5-505F-4DAC-94EE-6CEC71E8F659Q30596811-D1AEA383-BFD4-4B04-9745-B0EBAC445CF5Q30644485-3A4D284C-1D2E-4294-87E3-CADC473EC502
P2860
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
description
2010 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
2010 թուականի Սեպտեմբերին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած
@hyw
2010 թվականի սեպտեմբերին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված
@hy
2010年の論文
@ja
2010年論文
@yue
2010年論文
@zh-hant
2010年論文
@zh-hk
2010年論文
@zh-mo
2010年論文
@zh-tw
2010年论文
@wuu
name
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@ast
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@en
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@en-gb
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@nl
type
label
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@ast
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@en
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@en-gb
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@nl
prefLabel
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@ast
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@en
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@en-gb
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@nl
P2860
P50
P3181
P1433
P1476
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
@en
P2860
P304
P3181
P356
10.1371/JOURNAL.PMED.1000326
P407
P577
2010-09-01T00:00:00Z