| Main Board • Cheap Jordan Shoes 50% OFF Sale Store|Cheapjordan |
| 17.01.2017, 12:25 - nieeshoes - Rank 6 - 1159 Posts
Magazine In the Jan. 21 SN: Supercontinent superpuzzle, seeking better batteries, cheap jordan shoes , real nausea in virtual reality, reversing premature aging, http://cheapjordansstock.com , pitcher plant ambush, cheap wholesale jordans , quantum weirdness confirmed and more. Current Issue 1719 N Street, N.W. , Washington, cheap jordans free shipping , D.C. 20036 | 202.785.2255 | © Society for Science & the Public 2000 - 2017. All rights reserved.  , cheap jordans online ; Some of the most cited — and thereby influential — journal articles in pharmaceutical science belong to a category known as meta-analyses: studies that compare findings from two or more related human trials of a drug or treatments for a common disease. A new study now reports evidence that few such meta-analyses identify who funded the drug trials, even though such information could be useful in identifying potential conflicts of interest. And the kicker: In many cases, cheap real jordans , authors of the meta-analyses had access to those funding data; they appeared in the papers that initially reported the trials’ results. This is one of several troubling observations turned up by Michelle Roseman of McGill University in Montreal and her international team of colleagues, cheap jordans . The group details its findings in the March 9 Journal of the American Medical Association. The new analysis focused on randomized controlled trials — ones where patients had been randomly assigned to drug therapy or to control groups (where no treatment occurred), cheap air jordans . Several studies have shown that when drug companies fund such http://mylovesong.me/u...Jordan-Shoes-50-OFF-Sale/ http://www.forumposter...c=11781.msg14617#msg14617 http://ukflawless.com/...orum_topic&topic=2144 |