Literature DB >> 19015067

New technologies in cancer and their assessment. The clinical surgeon's point of view.

Javier Escrig Sos1, David Martínez Ramos.   

Abstract

The assessment of new technologies in oncological surgery is an important part of clinical research in cancer. The special characteristics of surgeons and surgical techniques determine particular problems. In this review, from the perspective of efficacy, effectiveness and efficiency, problematic specific aspects are discussed for diagnostic and therapeutic technologies.

Entities:  

Mesh：

Year:  2008        PMID： 19015067     DOI： 10.1007/s12094-008-0277-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol        ISSN： 1699-048X            Impact factor:   3.405


  20 in total

Review 1.  Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses.

Authors:  D Moher; D J Cook; S Eastwood; I Olkin; D Rennie; D F Stroup
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-11-27       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs.

Authors:  J Concato; N Shah; R I Horwitz
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-06-22       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 3.  Improving interpretation of clinical studies by use of confidence levels, clinical significance curves, and risk-benefit contours.

Authors:  T P Shakespeare; V J Gebski; M J Veness; J Simes
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-04-28       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 4.  Health-technology assessment in surgery.

Authors:  B Reeves
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 5.  Bias in surgical research.

Authors:  Carmen Paradis
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  [Efficacy assessment with random assignment using data bases: medicine-based evidence?].

Authors:  J A Sacristán; J Soto; I Galende
Journal:  Med Clin (Barc)       Date:  1998-11-14       Impact factor: 1.725

7.  'Unqualified success' and 'unmitigated failure': number-needed-to-treat-related concepts for assessing treatment efficacy in the presence of treatment-induced adverse events.

Authors:  M Schulzer; G B Mancini
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 7.196

8.  Adjusting the number needed to treat: incorporating adjustments for the utility and timing of benefits and harms.

Authors:  R Riegelman; W S Schroth
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1993 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Surgical treatment variation in a prospective, randomized trial of chemoradiotherapy in gastric cancer: the effect of undertreatment.

Authors:  Scott A Hundahl; John S Macdonald; Jacqueline Benedetti; Thomas Fitzsimmons
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 10.  Digital technologies and quality improvement in cancer surgery.

Authors:  D Mutter; G Bouras; J Marescaux
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.424
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.