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

Shanil Ebrahim

Showing results (61-70 of 79) with videos related to

Pageof 8
Sort By:
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|March 12, 2014
An efficient strategy allowed English-speaking reviewers to identify foreign-language articles eligible for a systematic reviewJason W Busse, Paul Bruno, Keshena Malik, et al.
Systematic Reviews|August 23, 2013
Opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: a protocol for a systematic review of randomized controlled trialsJason W Busse, Stefan Schandelmaier, Mostafa Kamaleldin, et al.
Systematic Reviews|November 27, 2014
Impact of missing participant data for dichotomous outcomes on pooled effect estimates in systematic reviews: a protocol for a methodological studyElie A Akl, Lara A Kahale, Arnav Agarwal, et al.
Systematic Reviews|March 19, 2013
Systematic review and network meta-analysis of interventions for fibromyalgia: a protocolJason W Busse, Shanil Ebrahim, Gaelan Connell, 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.
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.)|June 6, 2020
Evaluating the credibility of anchor based estimates of minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes: instrument development and reliability studyTahira Devji, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Anila Qasim, et al.
BMJ Open|October 2, 2015
Reporting, handling and assessing the risk of bias associated with missing participant data in systematic reviews: a methodological surveyElie A Akl, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Romina Brignardello-Petersen, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|November 13, 2015
Systematic reviews experience major limitations in reporting absolute effectsPablo Alonso-Coello, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Romina Brignardello-Petersen, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|August 25, 2016
Authors seldom report the most patient-important outcomes and absolute effect measures in systematic review abstractsArnav Agarwal, Bradley C Johnston, Robin W M Vernooij, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|December 15, 2020
Minimal important difference estimates for patient-reported outcomes: A systematic surveyAlonso Carrasco-Labra, Tahira Devji, Anila Qasim, et al.
Pageof 8

Showing results (61-70 of 79) with videos related to

Sort By:
Pageof 8
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|March 12, 2014
An efficient strategy allowed English-speaking reviewers to identify foreign-language articles eligible for a systematic reviewJason W Busse, Paul Bruno, Keshena Malik, et al.
Systematic Reviews|August 23, 2013
Opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: a protocol for a systematic review of randomized controlled trialsJason W Busse, Stefan Schandelmaier, Mostafa Kamaleldin, et al.
Systematic Reviews|November 27, 2014
Impact of missing participant data for dichotomous outcomes on pooled effect estimates in systematic reviews: a protocol for a methodological studyElie A Akl, Lara A Kahale, Arnav Agarwal, et al.
Systematic Reviews|March 19, 2013
Systematic review and network meta-analysis of interventions for fibromyalgia: a protocolJason W Busse, Shanil Ebrahim, Gaelan Connell, 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.
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.)|June 6, 2020
Evaluating the credibility of anchor based estimates of minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes: instrument development and reliability studyTahira Devji, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Anila Qasim, et al.
BMJ Open|October 2, 2015
Reporting, handling and assessing the risk of bias associated with missing participant data in systematic reviews: a methodological surveyElie A Akl, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Romina Brignardello-Petersen, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|November 13, 2015
Systematic reviews experience major limitations in reporting absolute effectsPablo Alonso-Coello, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Romina Brignardello-Petersen, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|August 25, 2016
Authors seldom report the most patient-important outcomes and absolute effect measures in systematic review abstractsArnav Agarwal, Bradley C Johnston, Robin W M Vernooij, et al.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|December 15, 2020
Minimal important difference estimates for patient-reported outcomes: A systematic surveyAlonso Carrasco-Labra, Tahira Devji, Anila Qasim, et al.
Pageof 8