Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Continue

Publications

A rapid research needs appraisal methodology to identify evidence gaps to inform clinical research priorities in response to outbreaks-results from the Lassa fever pilot.

Sigfrid L. et al, (2019), BMC Med, 17

National action plans to tackle NCDs: role of stakeholder network analysis.

Hunter RF. et al, (2019), BMJ, 365

Improving the science and evidence base of disaster response: a policy research study.

Jillson IA. et al, (2019), BMC Health Serv Res, 19

Molecular biomarkers and precision medicine in colorectal cancer: A systematic review of health economic analyses

Henderson R. et al, (2019), Oncotarget, 10, 3408 - 3423

Diabetic macular oedema and diode subthreshold micropulse laser (DIAMONDS): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Lois N. et al, (2019), Trials, 20

Core Outcome Set-STAndardised Protocol Items: the COS-STAP Statement.

Kirkham JJ. et al, (2019), Trials, 20

The James Lind Initiative: books, websites and databases to promote critical thinking about treatment claims, 2003 to 2018.

Chalmers I. et al, (2019), Res Involv Engagem, 5

Role of supplementary material in biomedical journal articles: surveys of authors, reviewers and readers.

Price A. et al, (2018), BMJ Open, 8

Doing trials within trials: a qualitative study of stakeholder views on barriers and facilitators to the routine adoption of methodology research in clinical trials.

Rick J. et al, (2018), Trials, 19

SMOOTH (Self-Management of Open Online Trials in Health) analysis found improvements were needed for reporting methods of internet-based trials.

Price A. et al, (2018), J Clin Epidemiol

Reflections on the history of systematic reviews.

Clarke M. and Chalmers I., (2018), BMJ Evid Based Med, 23, 121 - 122

Why Cochrane should prioritise sharing data.

Shokraneh F. et al, (2018), BMJ, 362

Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership - the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study.

Healy P. et al, (2018), Trials, 19

Global health trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise.

Rosala-Hallas A. et al, (2018), Trials, 19

Patient and public involvement in the design of clinical trials: An overview of systematic reviews.

Price A. et al, (2018), J Eval Clin Pract, 24, 240 - 253

Long-term outcomes for neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials.

Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) None., (2018), Lancet Oncol, 19, 27 - 39

Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: An updated systematic review and involvement of low and middle income countries.

Davis K. et al, (2018), PLoS One, 13

Right from the start: protocol for a pilot study for a randomised trial of the New Baby Programme for improving outcomes for children born to socially vulnerable mothers.

Macdonald G. et al, (2018), Pilot Feasibility Stud, 4

Priorities for methodological research on patient and public involvement in clinical trials: A modified Delphi process.

Kearney A. et al, (2017), Health Expect, 20, 1401 - 1410

Priorities for methodological research on patient and public involvement in clinical trials: A modified Delphi process

Kearney A. et al, (2017), HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 20, 1401 - 1410

Load More

Include forthcoming?