• International Guidelines: Adapt to local clinical practice or not?
• International research collaboration and funding and the relevance of African randomised controlled trials
• International standards for Public Reporting of Clinical Trial Outcomes and Results (PROCTOR): a proposal to increase the quality of evidence produced by systematic reviews
• Internet-based data management tool for systematic reviews
• Interobserver reliability for application of tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies
• Interpretation of patient-reported outcome measures: an inventory of over 3000 minimally important difference estimates and an assessment of their credibility
• Interpretation of PROS in Cochrane Reviews
• Interpretation of systematic review evidence: a tale of two nations
• Interpreting Cochrane systematic reviews: can we do without authors’ conclusions?
• Interpreting efficacy outcomes from open-label extension studies of anti-epileptic drugs
• Interpreting intergroup differences on low quality data of adverse events (AE) in primary clinical trials of non-drug interventions
• Interpreting pooled estimates in systematic reviews involving continuous variables
• Interpreting results of Cochrane Reviews and 'Summary of findings' tables
• Interpreting results of Cochrane Reviews and Summary of Findings Tables
• Interpreting results of Cochrane reviews, applying GRADE and creating ‘Summary of Findings’ tables
• Interpreting systematic review findings
• Interpreting systematic review findings (in Spanish)
• Interpreting the outcomes of stroke rehabilitation trials
• Interpreting the results of observational studies in the context of variation expected due to analytic flexibility
• Interpreting trial results following use of different intention-to-treat approaches for preventing attrition bias: a meta-epidemiological study
• Interpreting your review: how to avoid Cochrane’s most common major errors
• Intervention bias: presence and impact in trials of socially-complex health care interventions
• Intervention Component Analysis (ICA): enhancing the “implementability” of review findings on complex interventions
• Intervention Now To Eliminate Repeat Unintended Pregnancy in Teenagers (INTERUPT): multiple integrated review method exemplar
• Interventions during study design and conduct to reduce the risk of bias in interventional studies: a scoping review
• Interventions for age-related macular degeneration: What is the quality of the evidence?
• Interventions for improving condom use in people at risk for sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV
• Interventions for osteoporosis: a comparison of retrieval rates for RCTs using a broad labour-intensive search strategy, and Cochrane searching algorithms
• Interventions for pathological gambling: A systematic review
• Interventions for prevention and management of child abuse and neglect in low- and middle-income countries: an evidence and gap map
• Interventions for reducing violence against children: an Evidence and Gap Map in low- and middle-income countries
• Interventions for the control of childhood obesity in the South Asian region: a systematic review
• Interventions for Treating Hallux Valgus (Bunion)
• Interventions to enhance patient adherence to medication prescriptions
• Interventions to improve neonatal and child survival
• Interventions to improve question formulation in professional practice and self-directed learning
• Interventions to improve the mental health of children and young people with long-term conditions: Can evidence of effectiveness and evidence of patient experience be mutually informing?
• Interventions to Optimize the Care Cascade for Migrants Living with Chronic Viral Hepatitis: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review
• Interventions to reduce or stop inappropriate drug prescription: An overview of systematic reviews
• Interventions to reduce the incidence of falling in the elderly
• Interventions with multiple components of risk assessment, education, reminders and feedback improve osteoporosis disease management: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs
• Intravenous immunoglobulin for treating sepsis and septic
• Intravenous Immunoglobulin for Treating Sepsis and Septic Shock.
• Introducing a revised risk of bias tool for randomized trials
• Introducing a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials
• Introducing biomedical databases in China
• Introducing CiteSource: A new R package to explore source-level contributions to the stages of a systematic review
• Introducing Cochrane Global Mental Health: Improving the impact of Cochrane Mental Health in low- and middle-income countries
• Introducing cochrane reviews during the entry level physiotherapy curriculum—a preliminary report
• Introducing GRADEpro® and new features in RevMan 5
• Introducing INSPECT-SR: a tool for detecting problematic randomised controlled trials in health systematic reviews
• Introducing KSR Evidence: developing a database of critically appraised systematic reviews in the field of pain relief
• Introducing LATITUDES, a library of assessment tools and instruments used to assess data validity in evidence syntheses
• Introducing LATITUDES: a library of assessment tools and instruments used to assess data validity in evidence syntheses
• Introducing new guidance for plain language summaries for diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) reviews
• Introducing the cochrane library in central and eastern Europe
• Introducing The Cochrane Nutrition & Public Health Thematic Group
• Introducing the Global Evidence Synthesis Initiative (GESI)
• Introducing the new Cochrane Handbook chapter on equity—methods for systematic reviews with a focus on equity
• Introducing the risk of bias tool for non-randomized studies
• Introducing theory into systematic reviews: a discussion workshop
• Introducing US family physicians to Cochrane reviews
• Introduction of high evidence knowledge into daily surgical practice in El Salvador
• Introduction to a new risk of bias tool for network meta-analysis (RoB NMA tool)
• Introduction to analysis and meta-analysis of interrupted time series studies
• Introduction to Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy reviews (in Spanish)
• Introduction to Covidence - Cochrane's recommended online tool for review production
• Introduction to Covidence - Cochrane's recommended online tool for review production
• Introduction to Covidence - Cochrane's recommended online tool for review production
• Introduction to Covidence, Cochrane's recommended online tool for review production (for Spanish-speaking community)
• Introduction to diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) reviews
• Introduction to EPPI-Reviewer 4
• Introduction to evidence based practice in the Humanitarian Services of the Belgian Red Cross-Flanders: Experiences from a newly developed workshop
• Introduction to meta-analysis : meta-analysis of binary and continuous outcomes
• Introduction to meta-analysis 1: basic ideas for novices
• Introduction to meta-analysis 1: basic ideas for novices
• Introduction to meta-analysis 1: basic ideas for novices
• Introduction to meta-analysis 1: basic ideas for novices
• Introduction to meta-analysis 1: Basic ideas for novices
• Introduction to meta-analysis 1: meta-analysis of binary and continuous outcomes
• Introduction to meta-analysis 1: meta-analysis of binary and continuous outcomes
• Introduction to meta-analysis 2: dealing with heterogeneity
• Introduction to meta-analysis 2: dealing with heterogeneity
• Introduction to meta-analysis 2: meta-analysis of binary and continuous outcomes
• Introduction to meta-analysis 2: Meta-analysis of binary and continuous outcomes
• Introduction to meta-analysis 2: meta-analysis of binary and continuous outcomes
• Introduction to meta-analysis 2: meta-analysis of binary and continuous outcomes
• Introduction to meta-analysis 2: meta-analysis of binary and continuous outcomes
• Introduction to meta-analysis 3: dealing with heterogeneity
• Introduction to meta-analysis 3: dealing with heterogeneity
• Introduction to meta-analysis 3: dealing with heterogeneity
• Introduction to meta-analysis 3: dealing with heterogeneity
• Introduction to meta-analysis 3: dealing with heterogeneity
• Introduction to meta-analysis 3: Dealing with heterogeneity
• Introduction to meta-analysis 3: meta-analysis of time-to-event data
• Introduction to meta-analysis 4: including non-standard trials
• Introduction to meta-analysis 4: meta-analysis of time-to-event data
• Introduction to meta-analysis 4: meta-analysis of time-to-event data
• Introduction to meta-analysis 4: meta-analysis of time-to-event data
• Introduction to meta-analysis 5: including non-standard studies and non-standard data
• Introduction to meta-analysis 5: including non-standard studies and non-standard data
• Introduction to meta-analysis of continuous outcomes
• Introduction to meta-analysis using Stata
• Introduction to meta-analysis: basic ideas for novices – Part 1
• Introduction to meta-analysis: meta-analysis of binary and continuous outcomes – Part 2
• Introduction to meta-regression
• Introduction to network meta-analysis
• Introduction to plain language summaries for Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy (DTA) Reviews
• Introduction to RevMan Web
• Introduction to RevMan Web
• Introduction to RevMan Web for Cochrane Editors and Trainers
• Introduction to ROBIS, a new tool to assess the risk of bias in a systematic review
• Introduction to ROBIS, a tool to assess risk of bias in a systematic review
• Introduction to ROBIS, a tool to assess the risk of bias in a systematic review
• Introduction to ROBIS, a tool to assess the risk of bias in a systematic review
• Introduction to the Cochrane Register of Studies Online (CRSO)
• Introduction to the new guidance for plain-language summaries for Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews
• Introduction to the RoB 2 tool for assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial
• Introduction to the ROBINS-I tool (Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions)
• Introduction to the WISEST (Which Systematic Evidence Synthesis is best) Project: Developing an automated clinical decision-support algorithm to choose amongst systematic review(s) on the same topic
• Introduction to umbrella reviews
• Introductory/intermediate workshop for Cochrane Trials Search Co-ordinators
• Investigating and Dealing with Bias in Cochrane Systematic Reviews
• Investigating and dealing with bias in systematic reviews
• Investigating and dealing with bias in systematic reviews
• Investigating and dealing with bias in systematic reviews
• Investigating and dealing with bias in systematic reviews
• Investigating and improving the understanding of Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Reviews (DTARs)
• Investigating and improving the understanding of Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews (DTARs)
• Investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews
• Investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews
• Investigating clinical heterogeneity insystematic reviews
• Investigating conflicting outcomes in pregnancy and childbirth Cochrane reviews: what to do when interventions are beneficial for one party only
• Investigating determinants of expertsá judgement on appropriateness for diagnostic tests when using the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)á method for presenting evidence
• Investigating Heterogeneity Across Studies - A Review of the Systematic Reviews in the Infectious Diseases Module of the Cochrane Library
• Investigating Impact of Dietary Patterns: Can Consistent Findings Between Controlled Trials and Observational Evidence Improve Confidence?
• Investigating outcome reporting bias in Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorder (CFGD) reviews
• Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis
• Investigating risk of bias: special considerations for test-treatment interventions
• Investigating the incidence of delirium and its associated symptoms in a medical intensive care unit in Southern Taiwan
• Investigating the modelling of large routine datasets in primary care
• Investigating the use of the McMaster Premium Literat Ure Service (PLUS) as a method to efficiently update systematic reviews
• Investigating wish bias and mediating role of drug dose in Cochrane systematic reviews: the case-example of fluoxetine
• Investigation for randomisation procedure of Chinese original studies
• Investigation of authenticity of 'claimed' randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quality assessment of RCT reports published in China
• Investigation of selective reporting of outcomes and results associated with interrupted time series studies
• Investigation of The Extent of Adverse Events Reports Among Systematic Review: A Case Study of Medical Cannabis
• Investigation of within-study selective reporting in clinical research: Follow-up of applications submitted to a local research ethics committee
• Invitations to mammography screening: basis for an informed consent?
• Involvement of children and young people in development of an evidence synthesis framework for what interventions best prevent childhood obesity
• Involvement of government policy makers in prioritising national policy needs for systematic review: An Ethiopian experience
• Involvement of patients in the development of Cochrane protocols and reviews, a COPD survey, a patient blog, and a patient information leaflet
• Involvement of patients in the development of Cochrane protocols, a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease survey and a patient blog
• Involvement of people with learning disabilities in guidance development – lost in translation?
• Involving children and young people in the creation of dissemination materials for a complex evidence synthesis of interventions to improve the mental health of children and young people with long term physical conditions
• Involving clinical stakeholders in the systematic review process: exercises for low back pain
• Involving consumers in evidence based medicine
• Involving health workers by placing them in the centre: how Human-Centred Design can positively impact research and evidence synthesis
• Involving older adults and relevant stakeholders in the design and evaluation of the SITLESS complex intervention to reduce sedentary behaviour
• Involving patients in the development of clinical practice guidelines in Kazakhstan
• Involving people in determining outcomes for a proposed Health Technology Assessment surrounding pelvic organ prolapse
• Involving people in society and healthcare
• Involving people with learning disabilities in guideline development – a systematic review
• Involving perceptions of children with asthma in the controlled-exercise intervention – the PLAY framework
• Involving Public Health Professionals In Reviewing The Evidence And Developing Recommendations For Public Health Policy, Practice And Research.
• Involving service users and clinicians to identify research uncertainties of preterm birth: the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership
• Involving volunteers in translating Cochrane Plain Language Summaries to increase capacity
• Involving young people in all stages of a systematic review
• Involving young people in systematic reviews of qualita­tive and observational studies
• Iodised Salt for Preventing Iodine Deficiency Disorders
• IPD meta-analyses are important to improve evidence-based decisions in the geriatric population
• IPD meta-analysis of time-to-event data: One-stage versus two-stage approaches to estimating the hazard ratio
• Iranian biomedical researchers and their contribution to developing systematic reviews
• IRIS—a tool for prioritising guidance development at the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)
• Is a new approach for rating the quality evidence of effect estimates derived from matched-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAIC) needed?
• Is a search in trials registers sufficient to identify all relevant randomized controlled trials of a new drug?
• Is adequate reporting on health equity in systematic review equivalent to an equitable recommendation? A case report
• Is Amitriptyline the Reference Antidepressant?
• Is another validation of a clinical prediction rule necessary? A demonstration of research wastes using recursive cumulative meta-analyses
• Is clinically significant decisional conflict prevalent in primary care? A scoping review
• Is Cochrane review effective for the selection of essential medicine list of China: a case of antihypertensive medicines?
• Is Cochrane Wikipedia compatible?
• Is conducting a rapid review a method to filter the information overload?
• Is consumer information about arthroscopy available in Australia adequate for optimal evidence-infomed decision-making?
• Is effectiveness of complex interventions in primary care in cluster-randomized trials linked to methodological rigor? A systematic review
• Is evidence-based medicine a mirage in resource-constraint settings? A survey among resident doctors in selected teaching hospitals in Nigeria
• Is evidence-based medicine incorporated into the analysis of European health systems?
• Is further research really needed? Evidence from published comparative effectiveness reviews
• Is Google Translate useful for the selection of studies to be included in Cochrane reviews?
• Is health equity considered in systematic reviews of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group?
• Is health information from TV medical talk shows supported by evidence?
• Is it dangerous to publish reviews in paper journals?
• Is it necessary to perform full text papers selection by two independent reviewers in systematic reviews on diagnostic accuracy?
• Is it necessary to search a wide range of databases to identify diagnostic test accuracy studies?
• Is it necessary to search multiple databases for a focussed clinical question?
• Is it necessary to search trials registers?
• Is it necessary to treat acute otitis media for 10 Days? A meta-analysis
• Is it possible to develop guidance for HIV care in resource-poor settings with evidence from resource-poor settings?
• Is it possible to focus EMTREE without loss of sensitivity when searching Embase for systematic reviews? Evidence from practice
• Is it possible to match research outcome measures with patients' expectations?