Co-Authors
This is a "connection" page, showing publications co-authored by Holger Schünemann and Reem Mustafa.
Connection Strength
6.414
-
Decision making about healthcare-related tests and diagnostic test strategies. Paper 4: International guidelines show variability in their approaches. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Dec; 92:38-46.
Score: 0.733
-
Decision making about healthcare-related tests and diagnostic test strategies. Paper 1: a new series on testing to improve people's health. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 12; 92:16-17.
Score: 0.733
-
Decision making about healthcare-related tests and diagnostic test strategies. Paper 2: a review of methodological and practical challenges. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Dec; 92:18-28.
Score: 0.733
-
Decision making about healthcare-related tests and diagnostic test strategies. Paper 3: a systematic review shows limitations in most tools designed to assess quality and develop recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Dec; 92:29-37.
Score: 0.733
-
American Society of Hematology living guidelines on the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19: May 2021 update on the use of intermediate-intensity anticoagulation in critically ill patients. Blood Adv. 2021 10 26; 5(20):3951-3959.
Score: 0.244
-
American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines on the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19. Blood Adv. 2021 02 09; 5(3):872-888.
Score: 0.232
-
Use of facemasks during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet Respir Med. 2020 10; 8(10):954-955.
Score: 0.224
-
Using GRADE in situations of emergencies and urgencies: certainty in evidence and recommendations matters during the COVID-19 pandemic, now more than ever and no matter what. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 11; 127:202-207.
Score: 0.221
-
Development of the summary of findings table for network meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 11; 115:1-13.
Score: 0.205
-
GRADE guidelines: 22. The GRADE approach for tests and strategies-from test accuracy to patient-important outcomes and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 07; 111:69-82.
Score: 0.202
-
American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: diagnosis of venous thromboembolism. Blood Adv. 2018 11 27; 2(22):3226-3256.
Score: 0.199
-
GRADE guidelines: 20. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-inconsistency, imprecision, and other domains. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 07; 111:83-93.
Score: 0.192
-
Do clinicians want recommendations? A multicenter study comparing evidence summaries with and without GRADE recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 07; 99:33-40.
Score: 0.190
-
GRADE Guidelines: 19. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-Risk of bias and indirectness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 07; 111:94-104.
Score: 0.189
-
GRADE guidelines: 18. How ROBINS-I and other tools to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies should be used to rate the certainty of a body of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 07; 111:105-114.
Score: 0.189
-
Comment on "Perspective: NutriGrade: A Scoring System to Assess and Judge the Meta-Evidence of Randomized Controlled Trials and Cohort Studies in Nutrition Research". Adv Nutr. 2017 09; 8(5):789-790.
Score: 0.183
-
Decision making about healthcare-related tests and diagnostic test strategies. Paper 5: a qualitative study with experts suggests that test accuracy data alone is rarely sufficient for decision making. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Dec; 92:47-57.
Score: 0.183
-
Using patient values and preferences to inform the importance of health outcomes in practice guideline development following the GRADE approach. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017 May 02; 15(1):52.
Score: 0.179
-
Stakeholders apply the GRADE evidence-to-decision framework to facilitate coverage decisions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Jun; 86:129-139.
Score: 0.178
-
An educational game for teaching clinical practice guidelines to Internal Medicine residents: development, feasibility and acceptability. BMC Med Educ. 2008 Nov 18; 8:50.
Score: 0.099
-
GRADE approach to rate the certainty from a network meta-analysis: addressing incoherence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 04; 108:77-85.
Score: 0.050
-
A risk of bias instrument for non-randomized studies of exposures: A users' guide to its application in the context of GRADE. Environ Int. 2019 01; 122:168-184.
Score: 0.050
-
Corrigendum to "Advances in the GRADE approach to rate the certainty in estimates from a network meta-analysis" [J Clin Epidemiol 2018;93:36-44]. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Jun; 98:162.
Score: 0.048
-
Advances in the GRADE approach to rate the certainty in estimates from a network meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 01; 93:36-44.
Score: 0.046
-
Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 08 10; 8:CD008587.
Score: 0.046
-
GRADE guidelines 17: assessing the risk of bias associated with missing participant outcome data in a body of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Jul; 87:14-22.
Score: 0.045
-
Rating the certainty in evidence in the absence of a single estimate of effect. Evid Based Med. 2017 Jun; 22(3):85-87.
Score: 0.044
-
Systematic survey of randomized trials evaluating the impact of alternative diagnostic strategies on patient-important outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Apr; 84:61-69.
Score: 0.044