Search Results (1 to 10 of 10 Results)
Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS
Skip search results from other journals and go to results- 5 Journal of Medical Internet Research
- 2 JMIR Human Factors
- 1 JMIR Medical Education
- 1 JMIR Medical Informatics
- 1 JMIR Research Protocols
- 0 Medicine 2.0
- 0 Interactive Journal of Medical Research
- 0 iProceedings
- 0 JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
- 0 JMIR mHealth and uHealth
- 0 JMIR Serious Games
- 0 JMIR Mental Health
- 0 JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies
- 0 JMIR Preprints
- 0 JMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology
- 0 JMIR Cancer
- 0 JMIR Challenges
- 0 JMIR Diabetes
- 0 JMIR Biomedical Engineering
- 0 JMIR Data
- 0 JMIR Cardio
- 0 JMIR Formative Research
- 0 Journal of Participatory Medicine
- 0 JMIR Dermatology
- 0 JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting
- 0 JMIR Aging
- 0 JMIR Perioperative Medicine
- 0 JMIR Nursing
- 0 JMIRx Med
- 0 JMIRx Bio
- 0 JMIR Infodemiology
- 0 Transfer Hub (manuscript eXchange)
- 0 JMIR AI
- 0 JMIR Neurotechnology
- 0 Asian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal
- 0 Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
- 0 JMIR XR and Spatial Computing (JMXR)
A parallel step in efficient access and understanding came when Brian Haynes, founder of the Hi RU, and colleagues from around the world petitioned medical journal editors to require more informative abstracts for clinically important articles.
J Med Internet Res 2024;26:e58764
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
The process of selecting clinically relevant articles is further described by Haynes et al [35], and the high reliability of the critical appraisal step has been documented with a kappa value of over 80% for all categories of articles [36].
JMIR Res Protoc 2021;10(11):e29398
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Translating Clinical Questions by Physicians Into Searchable Queries: Analytical Survey Study
JMIR Med Educ 2020;6(1):e16777
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
The precision of the original report of the Haynes 1994 filter should be 22% and not 0.22. This leads to the F-measure being 36 and the NNR being 4.5.
J Med Internet Res 2012;14(4):e108
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
For example, the label “Haynes-2004-Sensitive” refers to the filter described by Haynes et al in their 2004 publication with the highest sensitivity (ie, the filter with the highest recall). Finally, we tested whether a combination of the best filters would improve performance.
Authors of systematic reviews often examine reference lists hoping to increase recall. We examined how this strategy would complement the use of filters in the area of clinical examination.
J Med Internet Res 2011;13(4):e82
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS