首页> 外文OA文献 >Doing More Harm than Good? Do Systematic Reviews of PET by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Provide an Appraisal of the Evidence That Is Closer to the Truth than the Primary Data Supporting Its Use?

【2h】

Doing More Harm than Good? Do Systematic Reviews of PET by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Provide an Appraisal of the Evidence That Is Closer to the Truth than the Primary Data Supporting Its Use?

机译：做得更弊大于好？通过健康技术评估机构对宠物进行系统评价，提供了比支持其使用的主要数据更接近真实性的证据吗？

代理获取

本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

页面导航

著录项
相似文献
相关主题

著录项

作者
Robert E. Ware; Rodney J. Hicks;
展开▼
作者单位

展开▼
年度 2011
总页数
原文格式 PDF
正文语种
中图分类

相似文献

外文文献
专利

1. Doing More Harm than Good? Do Systematic Reviews of PET by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Provide an Appraisal of the Evidence That Is Closer to the Truth than the Primary Data Supporting Its Use? [J] . Robert E. Ware, Rodney J. Hicks The Journal of Nuclear Medicine . 2012,第Suppla2期

机译：弊大于利？卫生技术评估机构对PET的系统评价是否提供了比支持其使用的主要数据更接近真实的证据？
2. Doing More Harm than Good? Do Systematic Reviews of PET by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Provide an Appraisal of the Evidence That Is Closer to the Truth than the Primary Data Supporting Its Use? [J] . Ware Robert E, Hicks Rodney J The Journal of Nuclear Medicine . 2011,第s1期

机译：弊大于利？卫生技术评估机构对PET的系统评价是否提供了比支持其使用的主要数据更接近真相的证据的评估？
3. Doing More Harm than Good? Do Systematic Reviews of PET by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Provide an Appraisal of the Evidence That Is Closer to the Truth than the Primary Data Supporting Its Use? [J] . Robert E. Ware, Rodney J. Hicks The Journal of Nuclear Medicine . 2011,第Supplementa2期

机译：弊大于利？卫生技术评估机构对PET的系统评价是否提供了比支持其使用的主要数据更接近真实的证据？
4. MCRB: A Multiclassifier Tool for Risk of Bias Assessment in a Systematic Review to Produce Health Evidence to Decision Making [C] . Ramon Gonçalves Pereira, Giulia Zanon Castro, Pamela Azevedo, IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems . 2020

机译：MCRB：用于系统评估健康偏见的系统评估中偏倚风险评估的多分类器工具
5. Updating systematic reviews: The policies and practices of health care organizations involved in evidence synthesis [D] . Garritty, Chantelle Marie 2009

机译：更新系统评价：参与证据综合的卫生保健组织的政策和实践
6. Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies: A Reflection on Legitimacy Values and Patient and Public Involvement Comment on Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe [O] . Mireille Goetghebeur, Marjo Cellier 2021

机译：健康技术评估机构的审议流程：关于合法性价值观和患者和公众参与评论通过全球卫生技术评估机构使用证据知识的审议程序的思考
7. PHP249 Evidence Review Group (ERG) Critique of Systematic Reviews (SR) Submitted to Nice as Part of Single Technology Appraisals (STA) or Multiple Technology Appraisals (MTA) in the Last Three Years [O] . Srivastava K, Rajora P, Gupta S, 2015

机译：PHP249证据审查小组（ERG）对系统审查（SR）的评论在过去三年中作为单项技术评估（STA）或多项技术评估（MTA）的一部分提交给Nice
8. Omega-3 Fatty Acids and Maternal and Child Health: An Updated Systematic Review. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment Number 224. Executive Summary. [R] . 2016

机译：Omega-3脂肪酸和母婴健康：更新的系统评价。证据报告/技术评估编号224.执行摘要。

Doing More Harm than Good? Do Systematic Reviews of PET by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Provide an Appraisal of the Evidence That Is Closer to the Truth than the Primary Data Supporting Its Use?

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅