Bibliography

Filters: First Letter Of Keyword is G  [Clear All Filters]
A B C D E F [G] H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z   [Show ALL]
Guidelines as Topic
Atkinson KM, Koenka AC, Sanchez CE, Moshontz H, Cooper H. Reporting standards for literature searches and report inclusion criteria: making research syntheses more transparent and easy to replicate. Res Synth Methods. 2015;6(1):87-95. Abstract
Kolasa K, Wasiak R. Health technology assessment in Poland and Scotland: comparison of process and decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28(1):70-6. Abstract
Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11:21. Abstract
Lehoux P, Tailliez S, Denis J-, Hivon M. Redefining health technology assessment in Canada: diversification of products and contextualization of findings. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20(3):325-36. Abstract
Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11:21. Abstract
Idänpään-Heikkilä JE, Fluss S. The CIOMS view on the use of placebo in clinical trials. Sci Eng Ethics. 2004;10(1):23-8. Abstract
Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: meta-narrative reviews. BMC Med. 2013;11:20. Abstract
Yoshii A, Plaut DA, McGraw KA, Anderson MJ, Wellik KE. Analysis of the reporting of search strategies in Cochrane systematic reviews. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009;97(1):21-9. Abstract
Bitzer EM, Busse R, Kohlmann T, Lühmann D, Perleth M. [Health technology assessment in the international context: where does Germany stand? For the "German Scientific Working Group Technology Assessment for Health care"]. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 1999;93(1):33-8. Abstract
Ang TW, ten Have H, Solbakk JH, Nys H. UNESCO Global Ethics Observatory: database on ethics related legislation and guidelines. J Med Ethics. 2008;34(10):738-41. Abstract
Derry S, Loke YK, Aronson JK. Incomplete evidence: the inadequacy of databases in tracing published adverse drug reactions in clinical trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2001;1:7. Abstract
Assasi N, Schwartz L, Tarride J-, Campbell K, Goeree R. Methodological guidance documents for evaluation of ethical considerations in health technology assessment: a systematic review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014;14(2):203-20. Abstract
Basch E. Beyond the FDA PRO guidance: steps toward integrating meaningful patient-reported outcomes into regulatory trials and US drug labels. Value Health. 2012;15(3):401-3.
Drummond M. Technology assessment in the German context. Eur J Health Econ. 2007;8 Suppl 1:S3.
SIGN 50: A guideline developer's handbook . Edinburgh: Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network; 2011.
Aagaard T, Lund H, Juhl C. Optimizing literature search in systematic reviews - are MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL enough for identifying effect studies within the area of musculoskeletal disorders? BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16(1):161. Abstract
ten Have HA. UNESCO's activities in ethics. Science & Engineering Ethics. 2010;16:7-15. Abstract
Golder S, Loke Y. Search strategies to identify information on adverse effects: a systematic review. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009;97(2):84-92. Abstract
NICE implementation programme. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2012.
Guidelines
Standards and operational guidance for ethics review of health-related research with human participants. Geneva: World Health Organization (WHO); 2011. Abstract
Guideline [Publication Type]
Tan-Torres Edejer T, Baltussen R, Adam T, Hutubessy R, Acharya A, Evans DB, et al. Making choices in health: WHO guide to cost-effectiveness analysis. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.
Search Standards and Guidelines Evidence (SAGE). Canadian Partnership Against Cancer Corporation; 2012. Abstract
Statements & Guidelines. American Heart Association (AHA); 2012. Abstract
ACP Clinical Practice Guidelines. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians; 2012. Abstract
eGuidelines.co.uk. MGP Ltd; 2012.