U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Trikalinos TA, Dahabreh IJ, Lee J, et al. Defining an Optimal Format for Presenting Research Needs [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2011 Jun. (Methods Future Research Needs Reports, No. 3.)

Cover of Defining an Optimal Format for Presenting Research Needs

Defining an Optimal Format for Presenting Research Needs [Internet].

Show details

References

1.
Clarke M. Doing new research? Don't forget the old. PLoS Med. 2004 Nov;1(2):e35. [PMC free article: PMC529424] [PubMed: 15578106]
2.
Clarke M, Chalmers I. Discussion sections in reports of controlled trials published in general medical journals: islands in search of continents? JAMA. 1998 Jun 15;280(3):280–282. [PubMed: 9676682]
3.
Clarke M, Alderson P, Chalmers I. Discussion sections in reports of controlled trials published in general medical journals. JAMA. 2002 Jun 5;287(21):2799–2801. [PubMed: 12038916]
4.
Patsopoulos NA, Analatos AA, Ioannidis JP. Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. JAMA. 2005 May 18;293(19):2362–2366. [PubMed: 15900006]
5.
Greenberg D, Rosen AB, Wacht O, et al. A bibliometric review of cost-effectiveness analyses in the economic and medical literature: 1976–2006. Med Decis Making. 2010 May;30(3):320–327. [PubMed: 20228286]
6.
Barton GR, Briggs AH, Fenwick EA. Optimal cost-effectiveness decisions: the role of the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC), the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF), and the expected value of perfection information (EVPI). Value Health. 2008 Sep;11(5):886–897. [PubMed: 18489513]
7.
Goeree R, O'Brien BJ, Blackhouse G, et al. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of long-term management strategies for heartburn. Value Health. 2002 Jul;5(4):312–328. [PubMed: 12102694]
8.
Blignault I, Ritchie J. Revealing the wood and the trees: reporting qualitative research. Health Promot J Austr. 2009 Aug;20(2):140–145. [PubMed: 19642963]
9.
Elliott R, Fischer CT, Rennie DL. Evolving guidelines for publication of qualitative research studies in psychology and related fields. Br J Clin Psychol. 1999 Sep;38(Pt 3):215–329. [PubMed: 10532145]
10.
Malterud K. Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001 Aug 11;358(9280):483–488. [PubMed: 11513933]
11.
Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349–357. [PubMed: 17872937]
12.
Drummond M, Manca A, Sculpher M. Increasing the generalizability of economic evaluations: recommendations for the design, analysis, and reporting of studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21(2):165–171. [PubMed: 15921055]
13.
Nuijten MJ, Pronk MH, Brorens MJ, et al. Reporting format for economic evaluation. Part II: Focus on modelling studies. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998 Sep;14(3):259–268. [PubMed: 10186465]
14.
Ramsey S, Willke R, Briggs A, et al. Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: the ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report. Value Health. 2005 Sep;8(5):521–533. [PubMed: 16176491]
15.
Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, et al. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996 Oct 23;276(16):1339–1341. [PubMed: 8861994]

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (921K)

Other titles in this collection

Related information

  • PMC
    PubMed Central citations
  • PubMed
    Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...