Prevalence of evidence of inconsistency and its association with network structural characteristics in 201 published networks of interventions
Published 2021 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
Prevalence of evidence of inconsistency and its association with network structural characteristics in 201 published networks of interventions
Authors
Keywords
-
Journal
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Volume 21, Issue 1, Pages -
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Online
2021-10-25
DOI
10.1186/s12874-021-01401-y
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- CINeMA: An approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis
- (2020) Adriani Nikolakopoulou et al. PLOS MEDICINE
- Advances in the GRADE approach to rate the certainty in estimates from a network meta-analysis
- (2018) Romina Brignardello-Petersen et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
- A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in simulated random-effects meta-analyses
- (2018) Dean Langan et al. Research Synthesis Methods
- Bibliographic study showed improving statistical methodology of network meta-analyses published between 1999 and 2015
- (2017) Maria Petropoulou et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
- The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations
- (2015) Brian Hutton et al. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
- Methods to estimate the between-study variance and its uncertainty in meta-analysis
- (2015) Areti Angeliki Veroniki et al. Research Synthesis Methods
- Characteristics of a loop of evidence that affect detection and estimation of inconsistency: a simulation study
- (2014) Areti Angeliki Veroniki et al. BMC Medical Research Methodology
- Predictive distributions for between-study heterogeneity and simple methods for their application in Bayesian meta-analysis
- (2014) Rebecca M. Turner et al. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE
- Conceptual and Technical Challenges in Network Meta-analysis
- (2013) Andrea Cipriani et al. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
- Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers
- (2013) Jeroen P Jansen et al. BMC Medicine
- Evaluation of inconsistency in networks of interventions
- (2013) A. A. Veroniki et al. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
- Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 4
- (2013) Sofia Dias et al. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING
- Simulation evaluation of statistical properties of methods for indirect and mixed treatment comparisons
- (2012) Fujian Song et al. BMC Medical Research Methodology
- Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies
- (2012) J. P. T. Higgins et al. Research Synthesis Methods
- Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple-treatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool
- (2012) Georgia Salanti Research Synthesis Methods
- Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression
- (2012) Ian R. White et al. Research Synthesis Methods
- Mixed treatment comparison analysis provides internally coherent treatment effect estimates based on overviews of reviews and can reveal inconsistency
- (2010) Deborah M. Caldwell et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
- Indirect Comparisons: A Review of Reporting and Methodological Quality
- (2010) Sarah Donegan et al. PLoS One
- Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis
- (2010) S. Dias et al. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE
- Mixed Treatment Comparison Meta-Analysis of Complex Interventions: Psychological Interventions in Coronary Heart Disease
- (2009) Nicky J. Welton et al. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
- Modeling between-trial variance structure in mixed treatment comparisons
- (2009) G. Lu et al. BIOSTATISTICS
- Adjusted indirect comparison may be less biased than direct comparison for evaluating new pharmaceutical interventions
- (2007) F. Song et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Publish scientific posters with Peeref
Peeref publishes scientific posters from all research disciplines. Our Diamond Open Access policy means free access to content and no publication fees for authors.
Learn MoreBecome a Peeref-certified reviewer
The Peeref Institute provides free reviewer training that teaches the core competencies of the academic peer review process.
Get Started