Linked article: This article is commented on by Scott J, p. 1195 in this issue and Williamson P, p. 1196 in this issue.
Choice of primary outcomes in randomised trials and systematic reviews evaluating interventions for preterm birth prevention: a systematic review
Article first published online: 27 FEB 2014
© 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Volume 121, Issue 10, pages 1188–1194, September 2014
How to Cite
Choice of primary outcomes in randomised trials and systematic reviews evaluating interventions for preterm birth prevention: a systematic review. BJOG 2014;121:118–1196., .
- Issue published online: 25 AUG 2014
- Article first published online: 27 FEB 2014
- Manuscript Accepted: 12 NOV 2013
- 1OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group. “The Oxford 2011 levels of evidence”. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. [http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653]. Accessed 30 January 2013.
- 3Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1. Chichester: The Cochrane Collaboration and John Wiley & Sons, 2008., , editors.
- 9The Editorial Team, Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group. About the Cochrane collaboration (Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs)) 2013, Issue 1. Art. No.: PREG. [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/o/cochrane/clabout/articles/PREG/frame.html]. Accessed 10 January 2013.
- 10A regulatory authority's opinion about surrogate endpoints. In: Nimmo WS, Tucker GT, editors. Clinical Measurement in Drug Evaluation. New York: Wiley, 1995. pp. 3–22..
- 20The COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) initiative. [http://www.comet-initiative.org/]. Accessed 14 June 2013.