Published in J Comp Eff Res on March 01, 2016
Clinical trials and systematic reviews addressing similar interventions for the same condition do not consider similar outcomes to be important: a case study in HIV/AIDS. J Clin Epidemiol (2017) 0.77
Updating the Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Domain Set: A Report from the PsA Workshop at OMERACT 2016. J Rheumatol (2017) 0.77
Choosing Important Health Outcomes for Comparative Effectiveness Research: An Updated Review and Identification of Gaps. PLoS One (2016) 0.75
Core Domains for Clinical Research in Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors: An International Modified Delphi Consensus Study. Crit Care Med (2017) 0.75
Patient preferences for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after injury: a discrete choice experiment. BMJ Open (2017) 0.75
The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ (2011) 29.14
Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer (1981) 28.83
Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet (2009) 12.28
GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol (2010) 11.77
The ClinicalTrials.gov results database--update and key issues. N Engl J Med (2011) 9.83
SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ (2013) 9.01
Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials (2012) 8.39
CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. PLoS Med (2010) 6.88
The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ (2010) 5.70
Biomedical research: increasing value, reducing waste. Lancet (2014) 5.39
Comparative effectiveness research: a report from the Institute of Medicine. Ann Intern Med (2009) 4.91
Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias - an updated review. PLoS One (2013) 4.38
Using the Delphi technique to determine which outcomes to measure in clinical trials: recommendations for the future based on a systematic review of existing studies. PLoS Med (2011) 3.62
OMERACT: an international initiative to improve outcome measurement in rheumatology. Trials (2007) 3.29
Defining a standard set of patient-centered outcomes for men with localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol (2014) 3.01
Characteristics of oncology clinical trials: insights from a systematic analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov. JAMA Intern Med (2013) 2.86
Recommendations for incorporating patient-reported outcomes into clinical comparative effectiveness research in adult oncology. J Clin Oncol (2012) 2.82
Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: a systematic review. PLoS One (2014) 2.75
Summary-of-findings tables in Cochrane reviews improved understanding and rapid retrieval of key information. J Clin Epidemiol (2010) 2.34
Driving up the quality and relevance of research through the use of agreed core outcomes. J Health Serv Res Policy (2012) 2.13
Getting the methods right--the foundation of patient-centered outcomes research. N Engl J Med (2012) 1.92
Recommended patient-reported core set of symptoms to measure in adult cancer treatment trials. J Natl Cancer Inst (2014) 1.72
Can a core outcome set improve the quality of systematic reviews?--a survey of the Co-ordinating Editors of Cochrane Review Groups. Trials (2013) 1.69
Current pharmacologic treatment of dementia: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Ann Intern Med (2008) 1.65
The COMET Initiative database: progress and activities from 2011 to 2013. Trials (2014) 1.64
Selective reporting bias of harm outcomes within studies: findings from a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ (2014) 1.58
Addressing rising health care costs--a view from the Congressional Budget Office. N Engl J Med (2007) 1.56
Early dialogue between the developers of new technologies and pricing and reimbursement agencies: a pilot study. Value Health (2011) 1.53
Toward patient-centered drug development in oncology. N Engl J Med (2013) 1.13
Choosing Important Health Outcomes for Comparative Effectiveness Research: An Updated Review and User Survey. PLoS One (2016) 1.12
Survey of new 2007 and 2011 Cochrane reviews found 37% of prespecified outcomes not reported. J Clin Epidemiol (2014) 1.11
COS-STAR: a reporting guideline for studies developing core outcome sets (protocol). Trials (2015) 1.10
Re: Neil E. Martin, Laura Massey, Caleb Stowell, et al. Defining a Standard Set of Patient-centered Outcomes for Men with Localized Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2015;67:460-7. Eur Urol (2015) 1.08
Content and quality of 10,000 controlled trials in schizophrenia over 60 years. Schizophr Bull (2012) 1.05
The COMET initiative database: progress and activities update (2014). Trials (2015) 0.92
Towards core outcome set (COS) development: a follow-up descriptive survey of outcomes in Cochrane reviews. Syst Rev (2015) 0.86
The quality of systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments. Qual Life Res (2015) 0.84
Core outcome sets and trial registries. Trials (2015) 0.82
Efficacy of β blockers in patients with heart failure plus atrial fibrillation: an individual-patient data meta-analysis. Lancet (2014) 6.10
Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet (2014) 5.37
Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials. BMJ (2015) 1.65
Selective reporting bias of harm outcomes within studies: findings from a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ (2014) 1.58
Major geographical variations in elective coronary revascularization by stents or surgery in England. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg (2014) 1.38
Prognostic models: a methodological framework and review of models for breast cancer. Cancer Invest (2009) 1.32
Assessing methods to specify the target difference for a randomised controlled trial: DELTA (Difference ELicitation in TriAls) review. Health Technol Assess (2014) 1.16
From plans to actions in patient and public involvement: qualitative study of documented plans and the accounts of researchers and patients sampled from a cohort of clinical trials. BMJ Open (2014) 1.11
How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a "Core Outcome Set" - a practical guideline. Trials (2016) 0.85
The Impact of Clinical Information on the Assessment of Endoscopic Activity: Characteristics of the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index Of Severity [UCEIS]. J Crohns Colitis (2015) 0.85
The time has come to register diagnostic and prognostic research. Clin Chem (2014) 0.83
Quality of life changes in patients undergoing treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Qual Life Res (2015) 0.77
What are funders doing to minimise waste in research? Lancet (2017) 0.77
Patient and clinician support for the learning healthcare system: recommendations for enhancing value. J Comp Eff Res (2016) 0.77
A systematic review protocol for reporting deficiencies within surgical case series. BMJ Open (2015) 0.75
β blockers in patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation - Authors' reply. Lancet (2015) 0.75
Bias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensus. BMJ Open (2016) 0.75
Authors' reply to Cunningham and Messerli and colleagues. BMJ (2016) 0.75