Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
about
Methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)The Effect of Disease Modifying Therapies on Disease Progression in Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisThe effect of disease modifying therapies on brain atrophy in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysisUse of a modified GreenScreen tool to conduct a screening-level comparative hazard assessment of conventional silver and two forms of nanosilverQuality assessment of observational studies in a drug-safety systematic review, comparison of two tools: the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the RTI item bank.The pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: A systematic review with network meta-analyses of randomised trials.The relationship between study sponsorship, risks of bias, and research outcomes in atrazine exposure studies conducted in non-human animals: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Relationship between Research Outcomes and Risk of Bias, Study Sponsorship, and Author Financial Conflicts of Interest in Reviews of the Effects of Artificially Sweetened Beverages on Weight Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Reviews.Interpreting trial results following use of different intention-to-treat approaches for preventing attrition bias: a meta-epidemiological study protocol.The Navigation Guide systematic review methodology: a rigorous and transparent method for translating environmental health science into better health outcomesThe Navigation Guide - evidence-based medicine meets environmental health: integration of animal and human evidence for PFOA effects on fetal growth.Assessing bias in osteoarthritis trials included in Cochrane reviews: protocol for a meta-epidemiological studyThe effect of disease-modifying therapies on brain atrophy in patients with clinically isolated syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Evidence from Toxicology: The Most Essential Science for PreventionEvaluation of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized clinical trials: overview of published comments and analysis of user practice in Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviewsHow credible are the study results? Evaluating and applying internal validity tools to literature-based assessments of environmental health hazards.Systematic review of community health impacts of mountaintop removal mining.Marketing trials, marketing tricks - how to spot them and how to stop them.Randomized clinical trials in dentistry: Risks of bias, risks of random errors, reporting quality, and methodologic quality over the years 1955-2013.The evidence base of methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder is in fact flawed.Using risk of bias domains to identify opportunities for improvement in food- and nutrition-related research: An evaluation of research type and design, year of publication, and source of funding.The reporting of funding in health policy and systems research: a cross-sectional study
P2860
Q22061981-165E890D-E33F-474B-9DD6-8EB91D995DA8Q26773978-1CB0BFDA-555C-4651-9B26-145244D7AA87Q26824991-35D732E2-3147-40AD-9406-AEE3CA246162Q28393577-ECEDD938-969D-4124-B99C-7630A37AAEC6Q33456912-7F97BE06-9237-408B-8F6E-CA34DA34AB61Q33898415-251DE2BB-2771-403A-9B2C-AED9AE6BA2DDQ34045690-5E3492AD-1904-4575-ADE2-C065F49378AAQ34047368-08180356-D8F3-42F5-9BA4-B25ACC636B62Q34264322-44AB9E5C-2A8C-4046-9036-03FFDCAC6740Q34275302-2B181938-0802-4A28-A8DD-7AA7A64B7471Q34275367-A1C91FD6-BFA1-4952-8C33-237D73CFE3F5Q34299192-8F83CC77-557B-42DD-BB2A-D2ADE21C3373Q36211674-E9C67830-808B-4463-BDF7-358FDAAE9B69Q36456218-ED62BCFC-B4E0-4C19-896C-B7FEAEDDA10BQ36887082-B71043FA-77A0-4496-8626-8A8781329B35Q36994018-796EBA5E-FBAB-418D-8D28-939444565932Q38652686-FA86D406-133B-429A-81EC-412936EA7DE9Q42317700-EFED3A5A-F89B-42F3-AB25-58426C8F0F2DQ47259028-33D17779-1142-490B-AB7B-6A3C20F5497EQ53968720-9BF790AC-AE96-4865-A9BE-C8C5B353AC4EQ55714559-ED173DEE-EDB3-4B60-A5A3-0BE4E1283A5BQ58770735-821AC849-01E9-45FA-87F7-2A2710063599
P2860
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
description
2013 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
2013 թուականի Դեկտեմբերին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած
@hyw
2013 թվականի դեկտեմբերին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված
@hy
2013年の論文
@ja
2013年論文
@yue
2013年論文
@zh-hant
2013年論文
@zh-hk
2013年論文
@zh-mo
2013年論文
@zh-tw
2013年论文
@wuu
name
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@ast
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@en
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@en-gb
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@nl
type
label
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@ast
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@en
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@en-gb
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@nl
prefLabel
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@ast
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@en
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@en-gb
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@nl
P2860
P3181
P1476
Why the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Should Include Funding Source as a Standard Item
@en
P2860
P3181
P356
10.1002/14651858.ED000075
P50
P577
2013-12-20T00:00:00Z