《2006CCO伊莫单抗治疗淋巴瘤诊疗指南》内容简介：

    This systematic review is a convenient and up-to-date source of the best availableevidence on ibritumomab tiuxetan in lymphoma. The body of evidence is comprised of dataprimarily from non-randomized controlled trial data or data available only in abstract form. Thatevidence forms the basis of a clinical practice guideline developed by the Hematology DSG.The systematic review and companion practice guideline are intended to promote evidence-based practice in Ontario, Canada. The PEBC is editorially independent of CCO and the OntarioMinistry of Health and Long-Term Care.

    《2006CCO伊莫单抗治疗淋巴瘤诊疗指南》内容预览：

    Entries to MEDLINE （Ovid） （1966 through May 2004）， MEDLINE Daily Update （Ovid）（May 19, 2004）， MEDLINE? In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations （Ovid） （May 19, 2004），HealthStar （Ovid） （1975 through April 2004）， CINAHL （Ovid） （1982 through May 2004）， and TheCochrane Library （Internet） （2004, Issue 2） databases were searched. The search strategy forMEDLINE is shown in Appendix I; searches in other Ovid databases were similar. Studies werelimited to humans but not restricted for language of publication or for publication type or studydesign.

    In addition, conference proceedings of the annual meetings of the American Society ofClinical Oncology （ASCO） （1995-2004） and the American Society of Hematology （ASH） （1996-2004） were searched for abstracts of relevant trials. The Canadian Medical AssociationInfobase （http://mdm.ca/cpgsnew/cpgs/index.asp）， the National Guidelines Clearinghouse（http://www.guideline.gov/index.asp）， and the National Institute for Clinical Excellence（http://www.nice.org.uk/） were also searched for existing evidence-based practice guidelines.

    Personal files were also searched.

    Relevant articles and abstracts were selected unblinded and independently by tworeviewers. Reviewers scored each item as “yes” （meets inclusion criteria）， “no” （if does notmeet inclusion criteria）， or “maybe” （if uncertainty regarding inclusion exists）。 If both reviewersagreed that the item met the inclusion criteria, the complete document was retrieved for further**ysis. When disagreements occurred, both reviewers reassessed together to achieveconsensus. When a score of “maybe” was given by both reviewers or if disagreementpersisted, the full document was retrieved and the inclusion criteria reapplied. Reasons forexcluding retrieved articles were documented. Agreement between the two reviewers wasassessed statistically by using the kappa statistic.

    点击下载***：《2006CCO伊莫单抗治疗淋巴瘤诊疗指南》