The Experts below are selected from a list of 385533 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Donna F. Stroup - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
improving the quality of reports of meta analyses of randomised controlled trials the quorom statement
British Journal of Surgery, 2000Co-Authors: David Moher, Susan Eastwood, Drummond Rennie, Deborah J. Cook, Ingram Olkin, Donna F. StroupAbstract:Background The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of clinical randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods The QUOROM group consisted of 30 clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, statisticians, editors, and Researchers. In conference, the group was asked to identify items they thought should be included in a checklist of standards. Whenever possible, checklist items were guided by Research evidence suggesting that failure to adhere to the item proposed could lead to biased results. A modified Delphi technique was used in assessing candidate items. Findings The conference resulted in the QUOROM statement, a checklist, and a flow diagram. The checklist describes our preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis. It is organised into 21 headings and subheadings regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis, and in the results with ‘trial flow’, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis; Research documentation was identified for eight of the 18 items. The flow diagram provides information about both the numbers of RCTs identified, included, and excluded and the reasons for exclusion of trials. Interpretation We hope this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports of meta-analyses of RCTs and that interested readers, reviewers, Researchers, and editors will use the QUOROM statement and generate ideas for its improvement. © 2000 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd
-
improving the quality of reports of meta analyses of randomised controlled trials the quorom statement
The Lancet, 1999Co-Authors: David Moher, Susan Eastwood, Drummond Rennie, Deborah J. Cook, Ingram Olkin, Donna F. StroupAbstract:Summary Background The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of clinical randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods The QUOROM group consisted of 30 clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, statisticians, editors, and Researchers. In conference, the group was asked to identify items they thought should be included in a checklist of standards. Whenever possible, checklist items were guided by Research evidence suggesting that failure to adhere to the item proposed could lead to biased results. A modified Delphi technique was used in assessing candidate items. Findings The conference resulted in the QUOROM statement, a checklist, and a flow diagram. The checklist describes our preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis. It is organised into 21 headings and subheadings regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis, and in the results with "trial flow", study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis; Research documentation was identified for eight of the 18 items. The flow diagram provides information about both the numbers of RCTs identified, included, and excluded and the reasons for exclusion of trials. Interpretation We hope this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports of meta-analyses of RCTs and that interested readers, reviewers, Researchers, and editors will use the QUOROM statement and generate ideas for its improvement.
David Moher - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
improving the quality of reports of meta analyses of randomised controlled trials the quorom statement
British Journal of Surgery, 2000Co-Authors: David Moher, Susan Eastwood, Drummond Rennie, Deborah J. Cook, Ingram Olkin, Donna F. StroupAbstract:Background The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of clinical randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods The QUOROM group consisted of 30 clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, statisticians, editors, and Researchers. In conference, the group was asked to identify items they thought should be included in a checklist of standards. Whenever possible, checklist items were guided by Research evidence suggesting that failure to adhere to the item proposed could lead to biased results. A modified Delphi technique was used in assessing candidate items. Findings The conference resulted in the QUOROM statement, a checklist, and a flow diagram. The checklist describes our preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis. It is organised into 21 headings and subheadings regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis, and in the results with ‘trial flow’, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis; Research documentation was identified for eight of the 18 items. The flow diagram provides information about both the numbers of RCTs identified, included, and excluded and the reasons for exclusion of trials. Interpretation We hope this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports of meta-analyses of RCTs and that interested readers, reviewers, Researchers, and editors will use the QUOROM statement and generate ideas for its improvement. © 2000 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd
-
improving the quality of reports of meta analyses of randomised controlled trials the quorom statement
The Lancet, 1999Co-Authors: David Moher, Susan Eastwood, Drummond Rennie, Deborah J. Cook, Ingram Olkin, Donna F. StroupAbstract:Summary Background The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of clinical randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods The QUOROM group consisted of 30 clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, statisticians, editors, and Researchers. In conference, the group was asked to identify items they thought should be included in a checklist of standards. Whenever possible, checklist items were guided by Research evidence suggesting that failure to adhere to the item proposed could lead to biased results. A modified Delphi technique was used in assessing candidate items. Findings The conference resulted in the QUOROM statement, a checklist, and a flow diagram. The checklist describes our preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis. It is organised into 21 headings and subheadings regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis, and in the results with "trial flow", study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis; Research documentation was identified for eight of the 18 items. The flow diagram provides information about both the numbers of RCTs identified, included, and excluded and the reasons for exclusion of trials. Interpretation We hope this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports of meta-analyses of RCTs and that interested readers, reviewers, Researchers, and editors will use the QUOROM statement and generate ideas for its improvement.
Jia Zhu - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
soft gated warping gan for pose guided person image Synthesis
Neural Information Processing Systems, 2018Co-Authors: Haoye Dong, Xiaoda Liang, Hanjiang Lai, Ke Gong, Jia ZhuAbstract:Despite remarkable advances in image Synthesis Research, existing works often fail in manipulating images under the context of large geometric transformations. Synthesizing person images conditioned on arbitrary poses is one of the most representative examples where the generation quality largely relies on the capability of identifying and modeling arbitrary transformations on different body parts. Current generative models are often built on local convolutions and overlook the key challenges (e.g. heavy occlusions, different views or dramatic appearance changes) when distinct geometric changes happen for each part, caused by arbitrary pose manipulations. This paper aims to resolve these challenges induced by geometric variability and spatial displacements via a new Soft-Gated Warping Generative Adversarial Network (Warping-GAN), which is composed of two stages: 1) it first synthesizes a target part segmentation map given a target pose, which depicts the region-level spatial layouts for guiding image Synthesis with higher-level structure constraints; 2) the Warping-GAN equipped with a soft-gated warping-block learns feature-level mapping to render textures from the original image into the generated segmentation map. Warping-GAN is capable of controlling different transformation degrees given distinct target poses. Moreover, the proposed warping-block is light-weight and flexible enough to be injected into any networks. Human perceptual studies and quantitative evaluations demonstrate the superiority of our Warping-GAN that significantly outperforms all existing methods on two large datasets.
Susan Eastwood - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
improving the quality of reports of meta analyses of randomised controlled trials the quorom statement
British Journal of Surgery, 2000Co-Authors: David Moher, Susan Eastwood, Drummond Rennie, Deborah J. Cook, Ingram Olkin, Donna F. StroupAbstract:Background The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of clinical randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods The QUOROM group consisted of 30 clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, statisticians, editors, and Researchers. In conference, the group was asked to identify items they thought should be included in a checklist of standards. Whenever possible, checklist items were guided by Research evidence suggesting that failure to adhere to the item proposed could lead to biased results. A modified Delphi technique was used in assessing candidate items. Findings The conference resulted in the QUOROM statement, a checklist, and a flow diagram. The checklist describes our preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis. It is organised into 21 headings and subheadings regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis, and in the results with ‘trial flow’, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis; Research documentation was identified for eight of the 18 items. The flow diagram provides information about both the numbers of RCTs identified, included, and excluded and the reasons for exclusion of trials. Interpretation We hope this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports of meta-analyses of RCTs and that interested readers, reviewers, Researchers, and editors will use the QUOROM statement and generate ideas for its improvement. © 2000 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd
-
improving the quality of reports of meta analyses of randomised controlled trials the quorom statement
The Lancet, 1999Co-Authors: David Moher, Susan Eastwood, Drummond Rennie, Deborah J. Cook, Ingram Olkin, Donna F. StroupAbstract:Summary Background The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of clinical randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods The QUOROM group consisted of 30 clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, statisticians, editors, and Researchers. In conference, the group was asked to identify items they thought should be included in a checklist of standards. Whenever possible, checklist items were guided by Research evidence suggesting that failure to adhere to the item proposed could lead to biased results. A modified Delphi technique was used in assessing candidate items. Findings The conference resulted in the QUOROM statement, a checklist, and a flow diagram. The checklist describes our preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis. It is organised into 21 headings and subheadings regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis, and in the results with "trial flow", study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis; Research documentation was identified for eight of the 18 items. The flow diagram provides information about both the numbers of RCTs identified, included, and excluded and the reasons for exclusion of trials. Interpretation We hope this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports of meta-analyses of RCTs and that interested readers, reviewers, Researchers, and editors will use the QUOROM statement and generate ideas for its improvement.
Drummond Rennie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
improving the quality of reports of meta analyses of randomised controlled trials the quorom statement
British Journal of Surgery, 2000Co-Authors: David Moher, Susan Eastwood, Drummond Rennie, Deborah J. Cook, Ingram Olkin, Donna F. StroupAbstract:Background The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of clinical randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods The QUOROM group consisted of 30 clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, statisticians, editors, and Researchers. In conference, the group was asked to identify items they thought should be included in a checklist of standards. Whenever possible, checklist items were guided by Research evidence suggesting that failure to adhere to the item proposed could lead to biased results. A modified Delphi technique was used in assessing candidate items. Findings The conference resulted in the QUOROM statement, a checklist, and a flow diagram. The checklist describes our preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis. It is organised into 21 headings and subheadings regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis, and in the results with ‘trial flow’, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis; Research documentation was identified for eight of the 18 items. The flow diagram provides information about both the numbers of RCTs identified, included, and excluded and the reasons for exclusion of trials. Interpretation We hope this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports of meta-analyses of RCTs and that interested readers, reviewers, Researchers, and editors will use the QUOROM statement and generate ideas for its improvement. © 2000 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd
-
improving the quality of reports of meta analyses of randomised controlled trials the quorom statement
The Lancet, 1999Co-Authors: David Moher, Susan Eastwood, Drummond Rennie, Deborah J. Cook, Ingram Olkin, Donna F. StroupAbstract:Summary Background The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of clinical randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods The QUOROM group consisted of 30 clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, statisticians, editors, and Researchers. In conference, the group was asked to identify items they thought should be included in a checklist of standards. Whenever possible, checklist items were guided by Research evidence suggesting that failure to adhere to the item proposed could lead to biased results. A modified Delphi technique was used in assessing candidate items. Findings The conference resulted in the QUOROM statement, a checklist, and a flow diagram. The checklist describes our preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis. It is organised into 21 headings and subheadings regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis, and in the results with "trial flow", study characteristics, and quantitative data Synthesis; Research documentation was identified for eight of the 18 items. The flow diagram provides information about both the numbers of RCTs identified, included, and excluded and the reasons for exclusion of trials. Interpretation We hope this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports of meta-analyses of RCTs and that interested readers, reviewers, Researchers, and editors will use the QUOROM statement and generate ideas for its improvement.
