Health-technology assessment in surgery

Lancet

Volumn 353, Issue SUPPL.1, 1999, Pages 3-5

  Reeves, Barnaby ^a  

^a ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HEALTH ECONOMICS; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SHORT SURVEY; SURGERY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0032929992     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)90413-0     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. NHS Management Executive. Assessing the effects of health technologies. London: Department of Health, 1992.
2. Nicolaides K, de Lourdes Brizot M, Patel F, Snijders R. Comparison of chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis for fetal karyotyping at 10-13 weeks' gestation. Lancet 1994; 344: 435-39.
3. Parker MJ, Handoll HHG, Robinson CM. Gamma nail versus sliding hip screw for extracapsular hip fractures. Cochrane Library. Oxford: Update Software, Issue 1, 1999.
4. Lomas J, Enkin M. Variations in operative delivery rates. In: Chalmers I, Enkin M, Keirse MJNC, eds. Effective care in pregnancy and childbirth. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989: 1182-95.
5. Billingham LJ, Abrams K, Jones DR. Quality of life assessment and survival data. In: Black N, Brazier J, Fitzpatrick R, Reeves BC, eds. Health services research methods: a guide to best practice. London: BMJ Books, 1998: 163-72.
6. Chalmers I, Hetherington J, Elbourne D, Keirse MJNC, Enkin M. Materials and methods used in synthesizing evidence to evaluate the effects of care during pregnancy and childbirth. In: Chalmers I, Enkin M, Keirse MJNC,eds. Effective care in pregnancy and childbirth. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989: 39-65.
7. The Cochrane Library. Oxford: Update Software, Issue 1, 1999. Website address - http://www.update-software.com/ccweb/cochrane/cdsr.htm
8. Guidelines for the management of colorectal cancer. London: Royal College of Surgeons of England and Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 1996.
9. Downs SH, Black NA, Devlin HB, Royston CMS, Russell RCG. Systematic review of the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Roy Coll Surg Engl 1996; 78: 241-323.
10. Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cook DJ. Users' guides to the medical literature. II. How to use an article about therapy or prevention. A. Are the results of the study valid? JAMA 1993; 270: 2598-601.
11. Peto R, Collins R, Gray R. Large-scale randomized evidence: large, simple trials and overviews of trials. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1993; 703: 314-40.
12. Black N. Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ 1996; 312: 1215-18.
13. Davey Smith G. Cross design synthesis: a new strategy for studying medical outcomes? Lancet 1992; 340: 944-46.
14. Reeves BC, MacLehose RM, Harvey IM, Sheldon TA, Russell IT, Black AMS. Comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomised and non-randomised studies. In: Black N, Brazier J, Fitzpatrick R, Reeves BCA, eds. Health services research methods: a guide to best practice. London: BMJ Books, 1998: 73-85.
15. Hlatky MA, Face MD, Califf RM, et al. Comparison of predictions based on observational data with the results of RCT of coronary artery bypass surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988; 11: 237-45.
16. Egger M, Schneider M, Davey Smith G. Meta-analysis: spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies. Br Med J 1998; 316: 140-44.
17. Horton R. Surgical research or comic opera: questions, but few answers. Lancet 1996; 347: 984-85.
18. Solomon MJ, McLeod RS. Clinical studies in surgical journals: have we improved? Dis Colon Rectum 1993; 36: 43-48.
19. A first class service. London: Department of Health, 1998.
20. Calafiore AM, Angelini GD. Left anterior small thoracotomy (LAST) for coronary artery revascularisation. Surgery 1997; 15: 61-63.