Letter to the Editor

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 60, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 863-865

  Riley, Richard D ^a   Ridley, Greta ^b   Williams, Katrina ^c   Altman, Douglas G ^d   Hayden, Jill ^e   de Vet, Henrica C W ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^e TORONTO WESTERN HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^f VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; GOLD STANDARD; HUMAN; LETTER; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PUBLICATION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; NOTE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROGNOSIS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 34250817964     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.02.004     Document Type: Letter

References (23)

1. Hemingway H. Prognosis research: why is Dr. Lydgate still waiting?. J Clin Epi 59 (2006) 1229-1238
2. McShane L.M., Altman D.G., and Sauerbrei W. Identification of clinically useful cancer prognostic factors: what are we missing?. J Natl Cancer Inst 97 (2005) 1023-1025
3. Altman D.G., and Lyman G.H. Methodological challenges in the evaluation of prognostic factors in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 52 (1998) 289-303
4. Simon R., and Altman D.G. Statistical aspects of prognostic factor studies in oncology. Br J Cancer 69 (1994) 979-985
5. McShane L.M., Altman D.G., Sauerbrei W., Taube S.E., Gion M., and Clark G.M. Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK). J Natl Cancer Inst 97 (2005) 1180-1184
6. Riley R.D., Abrams K.R., Sutton A.J., Lambert P.C., Jones D.R., Heney D., et al. Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future. Br J Cancer 88 (2003) 1191-1198
7. Kyzas P.A., Loizou K.T., and Ioannidis J.P. Selective reporting biases in cancer prognostic factor studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 97 (2005) 1043-1055
8. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Epidemiology (STROBE). Available at. www.strobe-statement.org
9. Altman D.G., De Stavola B.L., Love S.B., and Stepniewska K.A. Review of survival analyses published in cancer journals. Br J Cancer 72 (1995) 511-518
10. Burton A., and Altman D.G. Missing covariate data within cancer prognostic studies: a review of current reporting and proposed guidelines. Br J Cancer 91 (2004) 4-8
11. Holländer N., and Sauerbrei W. On statistical approaches for the multivariable analysis of prognostic factor studies. In: Auget J.-L., Balakrishnan N., Mesbah M., and Molenberghs G. (Eds). Advances in statistical methods for the health sciences (2006), Boston, MA: Birkhäuser
12. Royston P., Altman D.G., and Sauerbrei W. Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea. Stat Med 25 (2006) 127-141
13. Altman D.G., and Riley R.D. An evidence-based approach to prognostic markers. Nature Clin Pract Oncol 2 (2005) 466-472
14. Altman D.G. Systematic reviews of evaluations of prognostic variables. BMJ 323 (2001) 224-228
15. Riley R.D., Heney D., Jones D.R., Sutton A.J., Lambert P.C., Abrams K.R., et al. A systematic review of molecular and biological tumor markers in neuroblastoma. Clin Cancer Res 10 (2004) 4-12
16. Riley R.D., Abrams K.R., Lambert P.C., Sutton A.J., and Altman D.G. Where next for evidence synthesis of prognostic marker studies? Improving the quality and reporting of primary studies to facilitate clinically relevant evidence-based results. In: Auget J.-L., Balakrishnan N., Mesbah M., and Molenberghs G. (Eds). Advances in statistical methods for the health sciences (2006), Boston, MA: Birkhäuser
17. Altman D.G., Trivella M., Pezzella F., Harris A.L., and Pastorino U. Systematic review of multiple studies of prognosis: the feasibility of obtaining individual patient data. I. In: Auget J.-L., Balakrishnan N., Mesbah M., and Molenberghs G. (Eds). Advances in statistical methods for the health sciences (2006), Boston, MA: Birkhäuser
18. Sauerbrei W., Hollander N., Riley R.D., and Altman D.G. Evidence-based assessment and application of prognostic markers: the long way from single studies to meta-analysis. Commun Stat 35 (2006) 1333-1342
19. Hayden J.A., Cote P., and Bombardier C. Evaluation of the quality of prognosis studies in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med 144 (2006) 427-437
20. Bossuyt P.M., Reitsma J.B., Bruns D.E., Gatsonis C.A., Glasziou P.P., Irwig L.M., et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. BMJ 326 (2003) 41-44
21. Moher D., Schulz K.F., and Altman D. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA 285 (2001) 1987-1991
22. Counsell C., and Dennis M. Systematic review of prognostic models in patients with acute stroke. Cerebrovasc Dis 2 (2001) 159-170
23. Windeler J. Prognosis-what does the clinician associate with this notion?. Stat Med 19 (2000) 425-430