Referencia:
Li T, Vedula SS, Hadar N, Parkin C, Lau J, Dickersin K. Innovations
in data collection, management, and archiving for systematic reviews. Ann
Intern Med. 2015; 162(4):287-94.
viernes, 20 de febrero de 2015
martes, 10 de febrero de 2015
GRADE en Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Referencias:
1. Guyatt
GH, Oxman AD, Schünemann HJ, Tugwell P, Knotterus A. GRADE guidelines: A new
series of articles in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;
64 (4): 380–82.
2. Guyatt
G, Oxman AD, Akl E, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines 1.
Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol.
2011; 64 (4): 383–94
3. Guyatt
GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Atkins D, Brozek J, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines 2.
Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;
64 (4): 395-400.
4. Balshem
H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, et al. GRADE
guidelines 3: rating the quality of evidence - introduction. J Clin Epidemiol.
2011; 64 (4): 401-6.
5. Guyatt
GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE
guidelines 4: rating the quality of evidence - risk of bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;
64 (4): 407-15.
6. Guyatt
GH, Oxman AD, Montori V, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines 5:
rating the quality of evidence - publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64 (12):
1277-82.
7. Guyatt
G, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, Rind D, et al. GRADE guidelines
6. Rating the quality of evidence - imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64 (12): 1283-93.
8. Guyatt
GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Woodcock J, Brozek J, Helfand M; The GRADE Working Group.
GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence - inconsistency. J Clin
Epidemiol. 2011; 64 (12): 1294-1302.
9. Guyatt
GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Woodcock J, Brozek J, Helfand M; The GRADE Working Group.
GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence - indirectness. J Clin
Epidemiol. 2011; 64 (12): 1303-10.
10. Guyatt
GH, Oxman AD, Sultan S, Glasziou P, Akl EA, Alonso-Coello P; The GRADE Working
Group. GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence. J Clin
Epidemiol. 2011; 64 (12): 1311-16.
11. Brunetti
M, Shemilt I, Pregno S, Vale L, Oxman AD, Lord J; The GRADE Working. GRADE
guidelines: 10. Rating the quality of evidence for resource use. J Clin
Epidemiology. 2013; 66(2):140-50.
12. Guyatt
G, Oxman AD, Sultan S, Brozek J, Glasziou P, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE
guidelines: 11. Making an overall rating of confidence in effect estimates for
a single outcome and for all outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013; 66(2):151-7.
13. Guyatt
GH, Oxman AD, Santesso N, Helfand M, Vist G, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines
12. Preparing Summary of Findings tables-binary outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol.
2013; 66(2):158-72.
14. Guyatt
GH, Thorlund K, Oxman AD, Walter SD, Patrick D, Furukawa TA, et al. GRADE
guidelines 13. Preparing Summary of Findings tables-continuous outcomes. J Clin
Epidemiology 2013; 66(2):173-83.
15. Andrews
J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Alderson P, Dahm P, Falck-Ytter Y, et al. GRADE
guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and
presentation of recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013; 66(7):719-25.
16. Andrews
JC, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Pottie K, Meerpohl JJ, Coello PA, et al. GRADE
guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a
recommendation's direction and strength. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013; 66(7): 726-35.
sábado, 7 de febrero de 2015
Haga primero el protocolo...
...aquí está una guía.
Referencia:
Referencia:
Moher D,
Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew; PRISMA-P Group. Preferredreporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P)2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1.
Shamseer L,
Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A Deceased, Petticrew M; the PRISMA-P
Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysisprotocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;349:g7647.
No incluya dos veces los mismo datos...
...tendrá el doble o más en el efecto de la intervención. ¡Es un sesgo!
Referencia:
Senn SJ. Overstating the evidence: double
counting in meta-analysis and related problems. BMC Med Res
Methodol. 2009; 9:10.
viernes, 6 de febrero de 2015
¿Es un Spin trial?
1 ¿Es un ensayo cruzado, tal cómo lo presentan los autores?
Esa pregunta genera otras...
2. Si la cicatrización completa es, potencialmente, el principal criterio directo de valoración, ¿Por qué enfatizan en sangrado?
Referencia:
Córdoba-Fernandez A, Rayo-Rosado R, Juarez-Jiménez JM. Platelet gel for the surgical treatment of onychocryptosis. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2008;98(4):296-301.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)