• Refine your search:
  • 
    Keyword:
    
    • Assaigs clínics (1)
    • Biaix de publicació (1)
    • Clinical trials (1)
    • Computational Linguistics (1)
    • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (1)
    • Machine Learning (1)
    • Machine Learning and Data Mining (1)
    • Methodology (1)
    • Natural Language Processing (1)
    • Original Articles (1)
    •   more
  • 
    Creator / Publisher:
    
    • Williamson, Paula (6)
    • Gamble, Carrol (5)
    • Shaw, William (4)
    • Clayton-Smith, Jill (3)
    • Conroy, Elizabeth J (3)
    • Harman, Nicola (3)
    • Lohmander, Anette (3)
    • Munro, Kevin J (3)
    • Persson, Christina (3)
    • Semb, Gunvor (3)
    •   more
  • 
    Year
  • 
    Medium
  • 
    Type
  • 
    BLLDB-Access

Search in the Catalogues and Directories

All fields Title Creator / Publisher Keyword Year AND OR AND NOT All fields Title Creator / Publisher Keyword Year AND OR AND NOT All fields Title Creator / Publisher Keyword Year AND OR AND NOT All fields Title Creator / Publisher Keyword Year AND OR AND NOT All fields Title Creator / Publisher Keyword Year Sort by creator [A → Z]' creator [Z → A]' publishing year ↑ (asc)' publishing year ↓ (desc)' title [A → Z]' title [Z → A]' Simple Search Hits 1 – 8 of 8 1 Detect and Classify – Joint Span Detection and Classification for Health Outcomes ... The 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing 2021; Abaho, Micheal; Bollegala, Danushka. - : Underline Science Inc., 2021 BASE Show details 2 Methods for conducting international Delphi surveys to optimise global participation in core outcome set development: a case study in gastric cancer informed by a comprehensive literature review Alkhaffaf, Bilal; Blazeby, Jane M.; Metryka, Aleksandra... In: Trials (2021) BASE Show details 3 Does Sleep Position Influence Sleep-Disordered Breathing in Infants With Cleft Palate: A Feasibility Study? Murray, Clare S.; Walsh, Tanya; Bannister, Trisha... In: Cleft Palate Craniofac J (2021) BASE Show details 4 Timing Of Primary Surgery for cleft palate (TOPS): protocol for a randomised trial of palate surgery at 6 months versus 12 months of age Shaw, William; Semb, Gunvor; Lohmander, Anette. - : BMJ Publishing Group, 2019 BASE Show details 5 Timing Of Primary Surgery for cleft palate (TOPS): protocol for a randomised trial of palate surgery at 6 months versus 12 months of age. Shaw, William; Semb, Gunvor; Lohmander, Anette. - 2019 BASE Show details 6 Timing Of Primary Surgery for cleft palate (TOPS): protocol for a randomised trial of palate surgery at 6 months versus 12 months of age. Shaw, William; Semb, Gunvor; Lohmander, Anette. - 2019 BASE Show details 7 Selective reporting bias of harm outcomes within studies: findings from a cohort of systematic reviews Saini, Pooja; Loke, YK; Gamble, Carrol; Altman, DG; Williamson, Paula; Kirkham, Jamie. - : BMJ, 2014 Abstract: Objective: To determine the extent and nature of selective non-reporting of harm outcomes in clinical studies that were eligible for inclusion in a cohort of systematic reviews. Design: Cohort study of systematic reviews from two databases. Setting: Outcome reporting bias in trials for harm outcomes (ORBIT II) in systematic reviews from the Cochrane Library and a separate cohort of systematic reviews of adverse events. Participants: 92 systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies published in the Cochrane Library between issue 9, 2012 and issue 2, 2013 (Cochrane cohort) and 230 systematic reviews published between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2011 in other publications, synthesising data on harm outcomes (adverse event cohort). Methods: A 13 point classification system for missing outcome data on harm was developed and applied to the studies. Results: 86% (79/92) of reviews in the Cochrane cohort did not include full data from the main harm outcome of interest of each review for all of the eligible studies included within that review; 76% (173/230) for the adverse event cohort. Overall, the single primary harm outcome was inadequately reported in 76% (705/931) of the studies included in the 92 reviews from the Cochrane cohort and not reported in 47% (4159/8837) of the 230 reviews in the adverse event cohort. In a sample of primary studies not reporting on the single primary harm outcome in the review, scrutiny of the study publication revealed that outcome reporting bias was suspected in nearly two thirds (63%, 248/393). Conclusions: The number of reviews suspected of outcome reporting bias as a result of missing or partially reported harm related outcomes from at least one eligible study is high. The declaration of important harms and the quality of the reporting of harm outcomes must be improved in both primary studies and systematic reviews. URL: http://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/3003846/1/ORBIT%202.pdf http://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/3003846/ BASE Hide details 8 Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias Dwan, Kerry; Altman, Douglas G.; Arnaiz Gargallo, Juan Alberto. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS), 2008 BASE Show details

Mobile view All Catalogues UB Frankfurt Linguistik 0 IDS Mannheim 0 OLC Linguistik 0 UB Frankfurt Retrokatalog 0 DNB Subject Category Language 0 Institut für Empirische Sprachwissenschaft 0 Leibniz-Centre General Linguistics (ZAS) 0 Bibliographies BLLDB 0 BDSL 0 IDS Bibliografie zur deutschen Grammatik 0 IDS Bibliografie zur Gesprächsforschung 0 IDS Konnektoren im Deutschen 0 IDS Präpositionen im Deutschen 0 IDS OBELEX meta 0 MPI-SHH Linguistics Collection 0 MPI for Psycholinguistics 0 Linked Open Data catalogues Annohub 0 Online resources Link directory 0 Journal directory 0 Database directory 0 Dictionary directory 0 Open access documents BASE 8 Linguistik-Repository 0 IDS Publikationsserver 0 Online dissertations 0 Language Description Heritage 0