Word limits best explain failings of industry supported meta-analyses.
作者信息
Deeks Jonathan J
出版信息
BMJ. 2006 Nov 11;333(7576):1021. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39024.372662.1F.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Word limits best explain failings of industry supported meta-analyses.字数限制最能解释行业支持的荟萃分析的缺陷。
BMJ. 2006 Nov 11;333(7576):1021. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39024.372662.1F.
2
Cochrane reviews v industry supported meta-analyses: ten questions to assess bias in medical research.考科蓝系统评价与行业支持的Meta分析：评估医学研究偏倚的十个问题
BMJ. 2006 Oct 28;333(7574):916-7. doi: 10.1136/bmj.333.7574.916-b.
3
Cochrane reviews v industry supported meta-analyses: we should read all reviews with caution.Cochrane系统评价与行业支持的Meta分析：我们应谨慎阅读所有评价。
BMJ. 2006 Oct 28;333(7574):916. doi: 10.1136/bmj.333.7574.916.
4
Authors' reply on Cochrane reviews v industry supported meta-analyses.作者对Cochrane系统评价与行业支持的荟萃分析的回应。
BMJ. 2006 Nov 18;333(7577):1072-3. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39030.732917.3a.
5
6
Industry money skews drug overviews.行业资金使药物概述产生偏差。
Nature. 2005 Sep 22;437(7058):458-9. doi: 10.1038/437458b.
7
Small study on industry trial sponsorship leads to big questions about quality and bias.关于行业试验赞助的小型研究引发了有关质量和偏差的重大问题。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Jul 4;99(13):988-90. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djm057. Epub 2007 Jun 27.
8
Bias in the design, interpretation, and publication of industry-sponsored clinical research.行业资助的临床研究在设计、解读和发表过程中的偏倚。
Minn Med. 2008 Jun;91(6):46-7.
9
Evaluating solutions to sponsorship bias.评估赞助偏差的解决方案。
J Med Ethics. 2008 Aug;34(8):627-30. doi: 10.1136/jme.2007.022467.
10
Industry sponsored bias: NICE may be biased too.行业赞助导致的偏见：英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所（NICE）可能也存在偏见。
BMJ. 2011 Jan 25;342:d474. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d474.
引用本文的文献
1
Characteristics and Methodological Quality of Meta-Analyses on Hypertension Treatments-A Cross-Sectional Study.高血压治疗的Meta分析的特征与方法学质量——一项横断面研究
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2017 Feb;19(2):137-142. doi: 10.1111/jch.12889. Epub 2016 Aug 6.
2
Methodological quality of meta-analyses on treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a cross-sectional study using the AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) tool.系统评价治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病的方法学质量：使用 AMSTAR（评估系统评价方法学质量）工具的横断面研究。
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2015 Jan 8;25:14102. doi: 10.1038/npjpcrm.2014.102.
3
Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for premenstrual syndrome and premenstrual dysphoric disorder: a meta-analysis.用于经前综合征和经前烦躁障碍的选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂：一项荟萃分析。
Obstet Gynecol. 2008 May;111(5):1175-82. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31816fd73b.
4
Authors' reply on Cochrane reviews v industry supported meta-analyses.作者对Cochrane系统评价与行业支持的荟萃分析的回应。
BMJ. 2006 Nov 18;333(7577):1072-3. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39030.732917.3a.
本文引用的文献
1
Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: systematic review.Cochrane系统评价与行业支持的Meta分析及相同药物的其他Meta分析的比较：系统评价
BMJ. 2006 Oct 14;333(7572):782. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38973.444699.0B. Epub 2006 Oct 6.
2
Celecoxib for rheumatoid arthritis.塞来昔布用于类风湿性关节炎。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002(4):CD003831. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003831.
3
Efficacy, tolerability, and upper gastrointestinal safety of celecoxib for treatment of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review of randomised controlled trials.塞来昔布治疗骨关节炎和类风湿关节炎的疗效、耐受性及上消化道安全性：随机对照试验的系统评价
BMJ. 2002 Sep 21;325(7365):619. doi: 10.1136/bmj.325.7365.619.
4
Gastrointestinal toxicity with celecoxib vs nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: the CLASS study: A randomized controlled trial. Celecoxib Long-term Arthritis Safety Study.塞来昔布与非甾体抗炎药治疗骨关节炎和类风湿关节炎的胃肠道毒性：CLASS研究：一项随机对照试验。塞来昔布长期关节炎安全性研究。
JAMA. 2000 Sep 13;284(10):1247-55. doi: 10.1001/jama.284.10.1247.
Zotero 插件