Evaluating the role of quality assessment of primary studies in systematic reviews of cancer practice guidelines - sprookjes - yvandenbroek - TriplyDB

Evaluating the role of quality assessment of primary studies in systematic reviews of cancer practice guidelines

Evaluating the role of quality assessment of primary studies in systematic reviews of cancer practice guidelines

http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q24799623

about

Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stent for treatment of saphenous vein grafts: a meta-analysis Asynchronous telehealth: a scoping review of analytic studies.A system for rating the stability and strength of medical evidence Association between stress and breast cancer in women: a meta-analysis.The effect of exercise on pQCT parameters of bone structure and strength in postmenopausal women--a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Chinese herbal medicine and depression: the research evidence.Opposing systematic reviews: the effects of two quality rating instruments on evidence regarding t'ai chi and bone mineral density in postmenopausal women.Striking life events associated with primary breast cancer susceptibility in women: a meta-analysis study.Treatments for compulsive buying: A systematic review of the quality, effectiveness and progression of the outcome evidence.A critical review of the evidence on the use of videotapes or DVD to promote patient compliance with home programmes.Is there a relationship between subacromial impingement syndrome and scapular orientation? A systematic review.Cognitive analytic therapy: a review of the outcome evidence base for treatment.Interventions Promoting Testicular Self-Examination (TSE) Performance: A Systematic Review.A Critical Review of Grading Systems: Implications for Public Health Policy.

P2860

Q28474341-6A4E27EA-D0B1-4ADF-ACC0-5CE636E6CF35 Q30928090-01B8BB2B-CF57-4077-94A0-8556A5F0CE37 Q33260932-BFDDB5FB-F007-491F-A5A7-219A305A261B Q33520262-EB72A340-77DB-4F37-8CDB-9E08C70F1AED Q33980261-A1183375-1346-4F42-B801-E3397266D8FB Q34615943-39545182-2705-497C-8192-D2DDCEDF67FD Q34987117-7C8F40B0-0CD7-4748-9CAA-6E0BD7085859 Q37116550-884AA291-7CFE-43BF-84DF-D0FB9DBAEB48 Q37604876-D37151AF-FE5B-4813-8D9F-0247F6AFDCB9 Q37703224-1DCD8E53-50E2-44FA-A469-AD3C36D8880F Q38156737-51F435BA-5A05-4884-9831-7FA5CD08009F Q38194517-60C43121-191C-4A9F-8ACA-90A0A6A723DC Q38264108-24F2D4C2-8B29-463D-AA9C-BAFC37DA20D4 Q38831494-3162FD73-8771-404B-A970-BB28DA5EDD94

P2860

Evaluating the role of quality assessment of primary studies in systematic reviews of cancer practice guidelines

http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q24799623

description

2005 nî lūn-bûn

@nan

2005 թուականի Փետրուարին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած

@hyw

2005 թվականի փետրվարին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված

@hy

2005年の論文

@ja

2005年学术文章

@wuu

2005年学术文章

@zh-cn

2005年学术文章

@zh-hans

2005年学术文章

@zh-my

2005年学术文章

@zh-sg

2005年學術文章

@yue

name

Evaluating the role of quality ...... of cancer practice guidelines

@ast

Evaluating the role of quality ...... of cancer practice guidelines

@en

Evaluating the role of quality ...... of cancer practice guidelines

@nl

type

label

Evaluating the role of quality ...... of cancer practice guidelines

@ast

Evaluating the role of quality ...... of cancer practice guidelines

@en

Evaluating the role of quality ...... of cancer practice guidelines

@nl

prefLabel

Evaluating the role of quality ...... of cancer practice guidelines

@ast

Evaluating the role of quality ...... of cancer practice guidelines

@en

Evaluating the role of quality ...... of cancer practice guidelines

@nl

P1433

Q24799623-967B6FEB-E113-4061-B6CC-0590C69B25EE

P1476

Q24799623-FD85184E-3028-4A19-840B-50B162BF0C47

P2093

Q24799623-07E72C7A-7872-4DA3-B869-6B06FB178D2C

Q24799623-302F0FF4-1945-4ABD-9D5E-53A77AF97482

Q24799623-32DA8290-EC4A-4A3F-AF60-6855774A0E56

Q24799623-5953F346-99D5-4B2A-9BCA-A41F88153109

Q24799623-71864E7C-C67D-441B-BA74-933C1AE7F263

Q24799623-7A780296-7604-4299-9404-4F00FD1C0896

P2860

Q24799623-1A458136-B8D3-491D-9B92-2EBB29EE35A2

Q24799623-1EB6E8B0-6BB7-499B-8419-8726DD66C652

Q24799623-22E91B3A-7133-428F-BE5E-ACFBD3116673

Q24799623-249A0D41-51B7-43FE-A829-8E92DEA724DF

Q24799623-26EDD6F9-C950-448D-B7D3-882CBDCD9BA8

Q24799623-2AC01EED-233F-4790-8913-C205726AB2AC

Q24799623-377BD6AF-BCF4-40E4-A935-28FB1330AF3F

Q24799623-3CF5408B-CC58-4E3B-BA5E-32FF7D5C6411

Q24799623-4146B5D1-A817-4FD8-AF83-9459377FAF57

Q24799623-4B936AAD-2FAF-4B09-B042-11F6726190EC

P2888

Q24799623-9F3CD863-D24F-48AD-A975-3D201D84B90F

P304

Q24799623-02A3743D-4182-4C43-B3B9-89245A6075F9

P31

Q24799623-7B16E8DA-ACAF-454D-A1B1-D4FF73E30C81

Q24799623-D8782FEE-8EBE-499B-AE8A-B0CD0B276777

P356

Q24799623-253DECAC-4BA3-428C-886E-0540FC5165C4

P407

Q24799623-16DA238D-E917-4741-AC41-6ED99F926556

P433

Q24799623-A579EF61-956E-457E-80B0-5C72D0CCF0F7

P478

Q24799623-5E4A7DD2-D022-4F1F-948E-074DCAAFC489

P577

Q24799623-92BCD86D-BF58-4FAA-8F03-5F3A61BD6D1C

P5875

Q24799623-2B023EE5-76C9-4369-8462-1C33D17965EF

P6179

Q24799623-26A2747D-3EB5-47A3-8FF5-87E60AE5B3DC

P698

Q24799623-E2B886C1-3154-4C2C-8F47-B2785244F7C3

P932

Q24799623-58648A60-E643-45A4-BD33-2E4663479DF0

P356

P1433

BMC Medical Research Methodology

P1476

Evaluating the role of quality ...... of cancer practice guidelines

@en

P2093

Alejandro R Jadad

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

George P Browman

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

Manya L Charette

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

Mary E Johnston

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

Melissa C Brouwers

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

Steve E Hanna

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P2860

The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions

Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials

Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?

Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?

The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis

Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials: implications for the conduct of meta-analyses.

Assessing "best evidence": issues in grading the quality of studies for systematic reviews.

Impact of quality items on study outcome. Treatments in acute lateral ankle sprains.

Choosing a concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy regimen for squamous cell head and neck cancer: A systematic review of the published literature with subgroup analysis.

Funding new cancer drugs in Ontario: closing the loop in the practice guidelines development cycle.

P2888

P304

8

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P31

scholarly article

systematic review

P356

10.1186/1471-2288-5-8

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P407

P433

1

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P478

5

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P577

2005-02-16T00:00:00Z

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime

P5875

8017087

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P6179

1044013846

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P698

15715916

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P932

553981

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string