Proceeding Brapci-Revistas
Martha Silvia Silveira
Cícera Henrique da Silva
Josué Laguardia

[erro abnt]

References

  • AKOBENG, A. K. Principles of evidence based medicine. Archives of Disease in Childhood, v. 90, n. 8, p. 837-840, 2005.
  • AMSTRONG, R.., WATERS, E. Guidelines for systematic reviews of health promotion and public health interventions: Version 2. Melbourne: Melbourne University, 2007
  • ASSOCIAÇÃO MÉDICA BRASILEIRA., CONSELHO FEDERAL DE MEDICINA. Projeto diretrizes Disponível em: lt.,http://www.projetodiretrizes.org.brgt., Acesso em: 10 mar. 2014. AUTOR, 2011.
  • BRASIL. MINISTÉRIO DA SAÚDE. Diretrizes metodológicas: Elaboração de revisão sistemática e metanálise de ensaiois clínicos randomizados. Brasília: Ministerio da Saúde,2012. 92 p. (Série a: Normas e manuais técnicos)
  • BRASIL., MINISTÉRIO DA SAÚDE. Avaliação de tecnologias em saúde: Institucionalização das ações no ministério da saúde. Revista de Saúde Publica, v. 40, n., p. 4, 2006.
  • CHALMER, I.., GLASZIOU, P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet, v. 374, n. 9683, p. 86-89, 2009.
  • CHALMER, I.., HEDGES, L. V.., COOPER, H. A brief history of research synthesis. Evaluation and the Health Profissions, v. 25, n. 1, p. 12-37, 2002.
  • CHAN, K. S.., MORTON, S. C.., SHEKELLE, P. G. Systematic reviews for -based management: How to find them and what to do with them. American Journal of Managed Care, v. 10, n. 11 Pt 1, p. 806-812, 2004.
  • CROMBIE, I. K.., DAVIES, H. T. O. What is meta-analysis? London: Hayward Medical Communication, 2009. (What is series)
  • DIXON-WOODS, M. et al. Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: A quantitative and qualitative comparison of three methods. Journal of Health Services Research amp., Policy, v. 12, n. 1, p. 42-47, 2007. GRADE WORKING GROUP., ATKINS, D. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, v. 328, n. 7454, p. 1-8, 2004.
  • HEALTH-EVIDENCE.CA., . Developing an efficient search strategy using pico Disponível em: lt.,http://www.healthevidence.org/documents/practicetools/HETools_DevelopingEfficientSearchStrategyUsingPICO_18.Mar%3E. Acesso em: Date Accessed
  • HIGGINS, J. P. T. E. A. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0. (updated march 2011). 2011 LANDIS, J.., KOCH, G. The measurement of observer agrément for categorical data. Biometrics, v. 33, n., p. 159-174, 1977.
  • LIBERATI, A. et al. The prisma statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: Explanation and elaboration. BMJ, v. 339, n., p. b2700, 2009.
  • LOHR, K. N. Rating the strength of scientific evidence: Relevance for quality improvement programs. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, v. 16, n. 1, p. 9-18, 2004.
  • PANDIS, N. The evidence pyramid and introduction to randomized controlled trials. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, v. 140, n. 3, p. 446-447, 2011. PETTICREW, M.., ROBERTS, H. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2006
  • SCHARDT, C. et al. Utilization of the pico framework to improve searching pubmed for clinical questions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, v. 7, n., p. 16, 2007.
  • SHEA, B. J. et al. Amstar is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol, v. 62, n. 10, p. 1013-1020, 2009.
  • SHEA, B. J. et al. External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR). PLoS One, v. 2, n. 12, p. e1350, 2007.
  • SILVA, L. K. Avaliação tecnológica e análise custo-efetividade em saúde: A incorporação de tecnologias e a produção de diretrizes clínicas para os sus. CIência amp., Saúde Coletiva, v. 8, n. 2, p. 501-520, 2003.
  • STROUP, D. F. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiologylt.,subtitlegt.,a proposal for reportinglt.,/subtitlegt.,. Jama, v. 283, n. 15, p. 2008, 2000.
  • THACKER, S. B. Metanálisis: Un enfoque cuantitativo para la integración de investigaciones. Boletin de la Oficina Sanitaria Panamericana, v. 115, n. 4, p. 328-339, 1993.
  • THE JOANNA BRIGGS INSTITUTE. Joanna briggs institute reviewers’ manual: 2014 edition. Adelaide, Australia: University of Adelaide, 2014 em: lt.,http://joannabriggs.org/assets/docs/sumari/ReviewersManual-2014.pdf%3E. Acesso em:
  • TRONCOSO, V.., OKANO, V. Análise de concordância - kappa Disponível em: lt.,http://www.lee.dante.br/pesquisa/kappa/ - authorgt.,. Acesso em: Date Accessed
  • WADDINGTON, H. et al. How to do a good systematic review of effects in international development: A tool kit. Journal of Development Effectiveness, v. 4, n. 3, p. 359-387, 2012.
NLP0.29
Visto 12 vezes
sem referências