Open Access
J Extra Corpor Technol
Volume 38, Number 1, March 2006
Page(s) 71 - 73
Published online 15 March 2006
  1. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ. 1996;312:71–2. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Eccles M, Freemantle N, Mason J. Using systematic reviews in clinical guideline development, Systematic Reviews in Healthcare: Meta-analysis in Context. Edited by Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman D. London, BMJ Books 2001;400–18. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bailar JC3rd, Patterson K. The need for a research agenda. N Engl J Med. 1985;312:654–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Rennie D. Fourth International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. JAMA 2002;287:2759–60. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Merry AF, Davies JM, Maltby JR. Qualitative research in health care. BJA. 2000;84:552–5. [Google Scholar]
  6. Runciman WB. Qualitative versus quantitative research -balancing cost, yield and feasibility. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care. 1993;21:502–5. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B, Sutton A. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. Journal of Health Services and Research Policy. 2005;10:45–53. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Dixon-Woods M, Fitzpatrick R. Qualitative research in systematic reviews. Has established a place for itself. BMJ. 2001;323:765–6. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Jensen LS, Merry AF, Webster CS, Weller J, Larsson L. Evidence-based strategies for preventing drug administration error during anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 2004;59:493–504. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Huwiler-Muntener K, Juni P, Junker C, Egger M. Quality of reporting of randomized trials as a measure of methodologic quality. JAMA. 2002;287:2801–4. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA. 1996;276:637–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.