Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Wissenschaftliche Aussage und Wert von Veröffentlichungen

  • Chapter
Drug Epidemiology / Pharmako-Epidemiologie

  • 65 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Dieser Anhang ist ein Beispiel für angewandte Pharmakoepidemiologie. Er enthält einen Satz von Formularen, die konzipiert worden sind, um veröffentlichte Studien, die mit pharmakoepidemiologischen Methoden durchgeführt worden sind, systematisch und kritisch zu bewerten. Den Formularen ist ein kurzer Überblick über Konzepte und Methoden zur Beurteilung von veröffentlichter Literatur und der Bewertung ihrer Ergebnisse sowie die wesentlichen Stationen in der Geschichte ihrer Entwicklung vorangestellt. Er zeigt, daß die Entwicklung der qualitativen, systematischen Methoden zur kritischen Bewertung noch in den Anfängen steckt. Daher soll die Veröffentlichung dieser Formulare dazu beitragen, Standards zu entwickeln und zu definieren.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literaturzitate

  1. Sackett D.L., How to read clinical journals: why to read them and how to start reading them critically, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1981, (124), 555

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cooper HM, Scientific guidelines for conducting integrative research reviews, Review of Educational Research, 1982, (52), No. 2, 291–302

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hewett P, Chalmers TC, Using MEDLINE to peruse the literature, Controlled Clinical Trials, 1985, (6), 75–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hewett P, Chalmers TC, Perusing the literature, methods of assessing MEDLINE and related databases, Controlled Clinical Trials, 1985, (6), 168–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hartzema AG, McLeod DC, An annotated bibliography on pharmacoepidemiologic studies, in Hartzema AG, Porta MS, Tilson HH, Pharmacoepidemiology, an introduction, Harvey Whitney Books, 1989, 357–414

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hewitt P, Taming the literature, in Troidl H, Spitzer WO, McPeek B, et al., Principles and practice of research, strategies for surgical investigators, 2nd ed., Springer Verlag New York, 1991,49–62

    Google Scholar 

  7. Smith MC, Fisher JA, A computerized bibliography of research on medication use studies (MUST), Drug Information Journal, 1991, (25), 1, 115–112

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sigler C., Cyran R., Van de Carr S., 1980–1990 English language bibliography of pharmacoepidemiologic research using computerized administrative databases, Journal of Clinical Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, 1992, (6), 313–326

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sackett D.L., How to read clinical journals, part I, Why to read them and how to start reading them critically, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1981, (124), 555–558

    Google Scholar 

  10. Haynes R.B., How to read clinical journals, part II, to learn about a diagnostic test, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1981, (124), 703–710

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tugwell P.X., How to read clinical journals, part III, to learn the clinical course and prognosis of disease, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1981, (124), 869–872

    Google Scholar 

  12. Trout, K.S., How to read clinical journals, part IV, to determine etiology or causation, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1981, (124), 985–990

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sackett, D.L., How to read clinical journals, part V, to distinguish useful from useless or even harmful therapy, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1981, (124), 1165–1162

    Google Scholar 

  14. Light R.J., Smith P.V., Accumulating evidence, procedures for resolving contradictions among different research studies, Havard Educational Review, 1971, (41), 429–471

    Google Scholar 

  15. Glass G.V., Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research, Educational Researcher, 1976 (5), 3–8

    Google Scholar 

  16. Glass G.V., McGraw B., Smith M.L., Meta-analysis of social research, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1981

    Google Scholar 

  17. Glass G.V., Meta-analysis, an approach to the synthesis of research results, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1982 (19/2), 93–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Rosenthal R., Combining results of independent studies, Psychological Bulletin, 1978, (85), 185–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rosenthal R., Meta-analytic procedures for social research, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hedges L.V., Statistical methodology in meta-analysis, Princeton, N.J., ERIC Clearinghouse on Test, Measurement and Evaluation, Educational Testing Services, 1982, zitiert in: Troidl H., Spitzer W.O., McPeek, B., et al., Principles and Practice of Research, 2nd ed. 1991, Springer Verlag, New York

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hedges L.V., Olkin I, Statistical methods for meta-analysis, New York, Academic Press, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  22. Light R.J., Evaluation studies, review annual, Beverly Hills Calif., Sage Publications, 1983, Vol. 8

    Google Scholar 

  23. Light R.J., Pillemer D.B., Summing-up, the science of reviewing research, Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  24. Einarson T.R., McGhan W.F., Sabers D.L., Meta-analysis, quantitative integration of independent research results, American Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 1985, (42), 1957–1964

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Sacks H.S., Berrier J., Reitman D., Ancona-Berk V.A., Chalmers T.C., Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, New England Journal of Medicine, 1987, (316), 450–455

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Louis T.A., Fineberg H.V., Mosteller F., Findings for public health from meta-analysis, Annual Review of Public Health, 1985, (6), 1–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Greenland S., Quantitative methods in the review of epidemiologic literature, Epidemiol. Review, 1987, (9), 1–30

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Jenicek M., Meta-analysis in medicine, where we are and where we want to go, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1989, (42/1), 35–44

    Google Scholar 

  29. Spitzer W.O., Meta-analysis, unanswered questions about aggregating data, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1991, (44/2), 103–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Fleiss J.L., Gross A.J., Meta-analysis in epidemiology, with special reference to studies of the association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer, a critique, Journal of Epidemiology, 1991, (44), 127–139

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Felson D.T., Bias in meta-analytic research, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1992, (45/8), 885–892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Egger M., Smith G.D., Song F., Sheldon T.A., Making sense of meta-analysis, Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 1993, (2), 65–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wan Po, A.L., Fluoxetine and suicide, meta-analysis and Monte-Carlo simultations, Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 1993, (2), 79–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Gerbarg Z.B., Horwitz R.I., Resolving conflicting clinical trials, guidelines for meta-analysis, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1988, (41). 503–509

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Jenicek M., Meta-analysis in medicine. Where are we and where we want to go, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1989, (42), 35–44

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Mahon, W.A., Daniel E.E., A method for assessment of report of drug trials, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1964, (90), 565–569

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Lionel N.D.W., Herxheimer A., Assessing reports of therapeutic trials, British Medical Journal, 1970, (3), 637–640

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Slavin R.E., Best-evidence Synthesis, an alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews, Educational Researcher, 1986, (15), 5–11

    Google Scholar 

  39. Spitzer W.O., Lawrence V., Dales R., et al., Links between passive smoking and disease, a best-evidence synthesis, Clinical Investigative Medicine 1990, (13), 17–42

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bundesgesundheitsamt Berlin, Bundesrepublik Deutschland

    Annekarin Bertelsmann (Apothekerin und Diplom Epidemiologin (McGill), Wissenchaftlich Direktorin)

Authors
  1. Annekarin Bertelsmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1993 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bertelsmann, A. (1993). Wissenschaftliche Aussage und Wert von Veröffentlichungen. In: Drug Epidemiology / Pharmako-Epidemiologie. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-78713-3_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-78713-3_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-57560-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-78713-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation