• 1
    Winglee M, Valliant R, Scheuren F. A case study in record linkage. Surv Methodol. 2005;31:311.
  • 2
    National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy. Strategic Roadmap for Australian Research Infrastructure. Canberra ( AUST ) : Commonwealth Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research; 2008.
  • 3
    Holman CDA, Bass AJ, Rouse IL, Hobbs MST. Population-based linkage of health records in Western Australia: development of a health services research linked database. Aust N Z J Public Health. 1999;23:4539.
  • 4
    Centre for Health Record Linkage. Guide To Health Record Linkage Services. Version 1.3; Sydney ( AUST ) : Cancer Institute NSW; undated.
  • 5
    Deapartment of Health. Victorian Data Linkages [Internet]. Melbourne ( AUST ) : State Government of Victoria; 2011 [cited 2011 Mar]. Available from:
  • 6
    Bohensky M, Jolley D, Sundararajan V, Evans S, Scott I, Brand C. Data linkage: a powerful tool with potential problems. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:346.
  • 7
    Yancey WE. Evaluating string comparator performance for record linkage. In: Research Report Series (Statistics #2005–05) [Internet]. Washington ( DC ) : U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Research Division; 2005 [cited 2010 Nov]. Available from:
  • 8
    Gomatam S, Carter R, Ariet M, Mitchell G. An empirical comparison of record linkage procedures. Stat Med. 2002;21:148596.
  • 9
    Silveira DP, Artmann E. Accuracy of probabilistic record linkage applied to health databases: systematic review. Rev Saude Publica. 2009;43:87582.
  • 10
    Li B, Quan H, Fong A, Lu M. Assessing record linkage between health care and Vital Statistics databases using deterministic methods. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6:48.
  • 11
    Bopp M, Minder CE. Mortality by education in German speaking Switzerland, 1990–1997: Results from the Swiss National Cohort. Int J Epidemiol. 2003;32:34654.
  • 12
    Dunn KM, Jordan K, Lacey RJ, Shapley M, Jinks C. Patterns of consent in epidemiologic research: evidence from over 25,000 responders. Am J Epidemiol. 2004;159:108794.
  • 13
    Adams MM, Wilson HG, Casto DL, et al. Constructing Reproductive Histories by Linking Vital Records. Am J Epidemiol. 1997;145:33948.
  • 14
    Gyllstrom ME, Jensen JL, Vaughan JN, Castellano SE, Oswald JW. Linking birth certificates with Medicaid data to enhance population health assessment: methodological issues addressed. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2002;8:3844.
  • 15
    Hoving JL, Monaco A, MacFarlane E, et al. Methodological issues in linking study participants to Australian cancer registries using different methods: lessons from a cohort study. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2005;29:37882.
  • 16
    O'Reilly D, Rosato M, Connolly S. Unlinked vital events in census-based longitudinal studies can bias subsequent analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:3805.
  • 17
    Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust. 2006;185:2637.
  • 18
    Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar MS, et al. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User's Manual [Internet]. Santa Monica ( CA ) : Rand; 2001 [cited 2010 Sep]. Available from:
  • 19
    Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet. 2001;357:11914.
  • 20
    Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:15974.
  • 21
    Hartling L, Ospina M, Liang Y, et al. Risk of bias versus quality assessment of randomised controlled trials: cross sectional study. BMJ. 2009;339:b4012.
  • 22
    Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16:6273.
  • 23
    Grzybowski A. The journal impact factor: how to interpret its true value and importance. Med Sci Monit. 2009;15:SR14.