Page 51 of 51
Meta-analysis is often considered to be a simple way to summarize the existing literature. In this paper we describe how a meta-analysis resembles a conventional study, requiring a written protocol with design...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2:10
Although guidelines for critical appraisal of diagnostic research and meta-analyses have already been published, these may be difficult to understand for clinical researchers or do not provide enough detailed ...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2:9
Readers may question the interpretation of findings in clinical trials when multiple outcome measures are used without adjustment of the p-value. This question arises because of the increased risk of Type I er...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2:8
The aim of this study was to examine the determinants of publication and whether publication bias occurred in gastroenterological research.
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2:7
Language bias is a form of publication bias and constitutes a serious threat to meta-analyses. The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register is one attempt to remedy this and now contains more than 300,000 citations...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2:6
The study of cost-effectiveness comparisons between competing medical interventions has led to a variety of proposals for quantifying cost-effectiveness. The differences between the various approaches can be s...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2:5
Recently many long-term prospective studies have involved serial collection and storage of blood or tissue specimens. This has spurred nested case-control studies that involve testing some specimens for variou...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2:4
There is debate concerning methods for calculating numbers needed to treat (NNT) from results of systematic reviews.
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2:3
To consider the problem of the calculation of number needed to treat (NNT) derived from risk difference, odds ratio, and raw pooled events shown to give different results using data from a review of nursing in...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2:2
Calculation of numbers needed to treat (NNT) is more complex from meta-analysis than from single trials. Treating the data as if it all came from one trial may lead to misleading results when the trial arms ar...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2:1
The Multicentre Project for Tuberculosis Research (MPTR) was a clinical-epidemiological study on tuberculosis carried out in Spain from 1996 to 1998. In total, 96 centres scattered all over the country partici...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:14
The Digestive Diseases Week (DDW) is the major meeting for presentation of research in gastroenterology. The acceptance of an abstract for presentation at this meeting is the most important determinant of subs...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:13
Response rates to surveys are declining and this threatens the validity and generalisability of their findings. We wanted to determine whether paper quality influences the response rate to postal surveys
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:12
Published formulas for case-control designs provide sample sizes required to determine that a given disease-exposure odds ratio is significantly different from one, adjusting for a potential confounder and pos...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:11
To examine the effect of updating a systematic review of nicotine replacement therapy on its contents and conclusions.
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:10
Although a randomized trial represents the most rigorous method of evaluating a medical intervention, some interventions would be extremely difficult to evaluate using this study design. One alternative, an ob...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:9
Acceptability curves have been proposed for quantifying the probability that a treatment under investigation in a clinical trial is cost-effective. Various definitions and estimation methods have been proposed...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:8
We would expect information on adverse drug reactions in randomised clinical trials to be easily retrievable from specific searches of electronic databases. However, complete retrieval of such information may ...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:7
Many randomized trials involve measuring a continuous outcome - such as pain, body weight or blood pressure - at baseline and after treatment. In this paper, I compare four possibilities for how such trials ca...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:6
In order to assess the usefulness of radiolabeled white cell scanning in the diagnosis of intestinal inflammation, subjects were asked to rank several dimensions of preference for white cell scanning in relati...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:5
We examined whether quarterly patient enrollment in a large multicenter clinical trials group could be modeled in terms of predictors including time parameters (such as long-term trends and seasonality), the e...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:4
Guidelines published in major medical journals are very influential in determining clinical practice. It would be essential to evaluate whether conflicts of interests are disclosed in these publications. We ev...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:3
To comprehend the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT), readers must understand its design, conduct, analysis and interpretation. That goal can only be achieved through complete transparency from aut...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:2
Meta-analysis usually restricts the information pooled, for instance using only randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. This neglects other types of high quality information. This review explores ...
Citation: BMC Medical Research Methodology 2001 1:1
Speed
79 days to first decision for reviewed manuscripts only
57 days to first decision for all manuscripts
196 days from submission to acceptance
19 days from acceptance to publication
Citation Impact
4.615- 2-year Impact Factor
5.260 - 5-year Impact Factor
2.262 - Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)
1.820 - SCImago Journal Rank (SJR)
Usage
3,218,958 Downloads
3,897 Altmetric mentions