Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] D. Lindley. A STATISTICAL PARADOX , 1957 .
[2] M. Bartlett. A comment on D. V. Lindley's statistical paradox , 1957 .
[3] R Peto,et al. Why do we need some large, simple randomized trials? , 1984, Statistics in medicine.
[4] Jennifer L. Kelsey,et al. Methods in Observational Epidemiology , 1986 .
[5] F. Mosteller,et al. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. , 1992, JAMA.
[6] D G Altman,et al. Transfer of technology from statistical journals to the biomedical literature. Past trends and future predictions. , 1994, JAMA.
[7] G. Taubes. Epidemiology faces its limits. , 1995, Science.
[8] R. Kay. Statistical Principles for Clinical Trials , 1998, The Journal of international medical research.
[9] S. Krimsky,et al. Scientific Journals and Their Authors’ Financial Interests: A Pilot Study , 1998, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics.
[10] I. Olkin,et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement , 1999, The Lancet.
[11] J. Mesirov,et al. Molecular classification of cancer: class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring. , 1999, Science.
[12] ICH Harmonised Tripartite Guideline. Statistical principles for clinical trials. International Conference on Harmonisation E9 Expert Working Group. , 1999, Statistics in medicine.
[13] N. Risch. Searching for genetic determinants in the new millennium , 2000, Nature.
[14] I. Olkin,et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology - A proposal for reporting , 2000 .
[15] D G Altman,et al. What do we mean by validating a prognostic model? , 2000, Statistics in medicine.
[16] C. Adams,et al. Unpublished rating scales: A major source of bias in randomised controlled trials of treatments for schizophrenia , 2000, British Journal of Psychiatry.
[17] I. Olkin,et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta‐analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement , 2000, Revista espanola de salud publica.
[18] D. Moher,et al. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. , 2001, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.
[19] S. Senn. Two cheers for P-values? , 2001, Journal of epidemiology and biostatistics.
[20] D. Moher,et al. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials , 2001, The Lancet.
[21] J. Ioannidis,et al. Replication validity of genetic association studies , 2001, Nature Genetics.
[22] Anna-Bettina Haidich,et al. Reporting of conflicts of interest in practice guidelines of preventive and therapeutic interventions , 2001 .
[23] Jonathan A C Sterne,et al. Sifting the evidence—what's wrong with significance tests? , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.
[24] Anna-Bettina Haidich,et al. Any casualties in the clash of randomised and observational evidence? , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.
[25] J. Ioannidis,et al. Predictive ability of DNA microarrays for cancer outcomes and correlates: an empirical assessment , 2003, The Lancet.
[26] P. McKeigue,et al. For Personal Use. Only Reproduce with Permission from the Lancet Publishing Group. Problems of Reporting Genetic Associations with Complex Outcomes , 2022 .
[27] Huey-miin Hsueh,et al. Comparison of Methods for Estimating the Number of True Null Hypotheses in Multiplicity Testing , 2003, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.
[28] John P A Ioannidis,et al. Genetic associations: false or true? , 2003, Trends in molecular medicine.
[29] Douglas G. Altman,et al. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials , 2001, The Lancet.
[30] D. Ransohoff. Rules of evidence for cancer molecular-marker discovery and validation , 2004, Nature Reviews Cancer.
[31] Eric J Topol,et al. Failing the public health--rofecoxib, Merck, and the FDA. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.
[32] John Hoey,et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.
[33] A. Hrõbjartsson,et al. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. , 2004, JAMA.
[34] Nathaniel Rothman,et al. Assessing the probability that a positive report is false: an approach for molecular epidemiology studies. , 2004, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
[35] J. Ioannidis,et al. Better Reporting of Harms in Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement , 2004, Annals of Internal Medicine.
[36] R. Horton,et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. , 2005, Circulation research.
[37] D. Lawlor,et al. Those confounded vitamins: what can we learn from the differences between observational versus randomised trial evidence? , 2004, The Lancet.
[38] Jan P Vandenbroucke,et al. When are observational studies as credible as randomised trials? , 2004, The Lancet.
[39] Stefan Michiels,et al. Prediction of cancer outcome with microarrays: a multiple random validation strategy , 2005, The Lancet.
[40] J. Ioannidis. Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research. , 2005, JAMA.
[41] J. Ioannidis. Microarrays and molecular research: noise discovery? , 2005, The Lancet.
[42] John Hoey,et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. , 2005, Circulation.
[43] Thomas A Trikalinos,et al. Early extreme contradictory estimates may appear in published research: the Proteus phenomenon in molecular genetics research and randomized trials. , 2005, Journal of clinical epidemiology.
[44] Peter C Gøtzsche,et al. [Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement]. , 2005, Ugeskrift for laeger.