Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of diagnostic tests

Clinical Radiology

Volumn 60, Issue 9, 2005, Pages 977-979

  Halligan, S ^a  

^a ST MARK S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MUSCLE RELAXANT AGENT;

CLINICAL TRIAL; COLON POLYP; COLON RADIOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EDITORIAL; HUMAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; META ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS; REVIEW LITERATURE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 23944527099     PISSN: 00099260     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2005.04.013     Document Type: Editorial

References (12)

1. Top 20 most downloaded articles from Clinical Radiology: October 2003-2004. Clin Radiol 2005;60:139-40.
2. Anonymous Who are the experts, where is the expertise? Drug Ther Bull 47 2002 55-56
3. P.C. Gotzsche Reference bias in reports of drug trials BMJ 295 1987 654-656
4. S.A. Taylor S. Halligan V. Goh et al. Optimizing colonic distention for multi-detector row CT colonography: Effect of hyoscine butylbromide and rectal balloon catheter Radiology 229 2003 99-108
5. J.F. Bruzzi A.C. Moss D.D. Brennan P. MacMathuna H.M. Fenlon Efficacy of IV buscopan as a muscle relaxant in CT colonography Eur Radiol 13 2003 2264-2270
6. S. Halligan W.A. Atkin Commentary. Unbiased studies are needed before virtual colonoscopy can be dismissed Lancet 365 2005 275-276
7. D.G. Altman The scandal of poor medical research BMJ 308 1994 283-284
8. R. Lilford A.J. Stevens Underpowered studies Br J Surg 89 2002 129-131
9. M.C. Reid M.S. Lachs A.R. Feinstein Use of methodological standards in diagnostic test research. Getting better but still not good JAMA 274 1995 645-651
10. L.S. Cooper T.C. Chalmers M. McCally J. Berrier H.S. Sacks The poor quality of early evaluations of magnetic resonance imaging JAMA 259 1988 3277-3280
11. Purkayastha S, Tekkis P, Athansiou T, et al. Magnetic resonance colonography versus colonoscopy as a diagnostic modality for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis. Clin Radiol; 2005;60:980-9.
12. J.J. Deeks Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests In: M. Egger G.D. Smith D.G. Altman Eds. Systematic reviews in health care 2nd ed 2001 BMJ London, UK 248-282