• PLoS medicine · Oct 2014

    Critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies: the CHARMS checklist.

    • Karel G M Moons, Joris A H de Groot, Walter Bouwmeester, Yvonne Vergouwe, Susan Mallett, Douglas G Altman, Johannes B Reitsma, and Gary S Collins.
    • Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
    • PLoS Med. 2014 Oct 1; 11 (10): e1001744e1001744.

    AbstractCarl Moons and colleagues provide a checklist and background explanation for critically appraising and extracting data from systematic reviews of prognostic and diagnostic prediction modelling studies. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…