Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Filters

Hector Pardo-Hernandez

Showing results (31-40 of 48) with videos related to

Pageof 5
Sort By:
BMJ Open|June 23, 2020
Quality of reporting for randomised clinical trials published in Latin American and Spanish journals: A protocol for a systematic survey of three clinical specialitiesVivienne C Bachelet, Víctor A Carrasco, Fabiana Bravo-Córdova, et al.
BMJ Open|August 5, 2017
Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: the UpPriority Tool protocolLaura Martínez García, Hector Pardo-Hernandez, Ena Niño de Guzman, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|June 23, 2020
The UpPriority tool was developed to guide the prioritization of clinical guideline questions for updatingAndrea Juliana Sanabria, Hector Pardo-Hernandez, Mónica Ballesteros, et al.
Annals of Internal Medicine|April 20, 2026
Core Performance Measures for Migraine Headache: A Review by the American College of PhysiciansAmir Qaseem, Rhea E Powell, Brook Watts, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|May 28, 2017
Methodological systematic review identifies major limitations in prioritization processes for updatingLaura Martínez García, Hector Pardo-Hernandez, Cecilia Superchi, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|February 17, 2018
GRADE Guidelines: 19. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-Risk of bias and indirectnessYuan Zhang, Pablo Alonso-Coello, Gordon H Guyatt, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|May 26, 2018
GRADE guidelines: 20. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-inconsistency, imprecision, and other domainsYuan Zhang, Pablo Alonso Coello, Gordon H Guyatt, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|November 12, 2016
Randomized trials addressing a similar question are commonly published after a trial stopped early for benefitM Hassan Murad, Gordon H Guyatt, Juan Pablo Domecq, et al.
The European Respiratory Journal|July 14, 2018
A systematic review of how patients value COPD outcomesYuan Zhang, Rebecca L Morgan, Pablo Alonso-Coello, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|June 27, 2022
Serious reporting deficiencies exist in minimal important difference studies: current state and suggestions for improvementAlonso Carrasco-Labra, Tahira Devji, Anila Qasim, et al.
Pageof 5

Showing results (31-40 of 48) with videos related to

Sort By:
Pageof 5
BMJ Open|June 23, 2020
Quality of reporting for randomised clinical trials published in Latin American and Spanish journals: A protocol for a systematic survey of three clinical specialitiesVivienne C Bachelet, Víctor A Carrasco, Fabiana Bravo-Córdova, et al.
BMJ Open|August 5, 2017
Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: the UpPriority Tool protocolLaura Martínez García, Hector Pardo-Hernandez, Ena Niño de Guzman, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|June 23, 2020
The UpPriority tool was developed to guide the prioritization of clinical guideline questions for updatingAndrea Juliana Sanabria, Hector Pardo-Hernandez, Mónica Ballesteros, et al.
Annals of Internal Medicine|April 20, 2026
Core Performance Measures for Migraine Headache: A Review by the American College of PhysiciansAmir Qaseem, Rhea E Powell, Brook Watts, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|May 28, 2017
Methodological systematic review identifies major limitations in prioritization processes for updatingLaura Martínez García, Hector Pardo-Hernandez, Cecilia Superchi, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|February 17, 2018
GRADE Guidelines: 19. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-Risk of bias and indirectnessYuan Zhang, Pablo Alonso-Coello, Gordon H Guyatt, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|May 26, 2018
GRADE guidelines: 20. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-inconsistency, imprecision, and other domainsYuan Zhang, Pablo Alonso Coello, Gordon H Guyatt, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|November 12, 2016
Randomized trials addressing a similar question are commonly published after a trial stopped early for benefitM Hassan Murad, Gordon H Guyatt, Juan Pablo Domecq, et al.
The European Respiratory Journal|July 14, 2018
A systematic review of how patients value COPD outcomesYuan Zhang, Rebecca L Morgan, Pablo Alonso-Coello, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|June 27, 2022
Serious reporting deficiencies exist in minimal important difference studies: current state and suggestions for improvementAlonso Carrasco-Labra, Tahira Devji, Anila Qasim, et al.
Pageof 5