Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 102

1.

Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence.

Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JP.

BMJ. 2005 Oct 15;331(7521):897-900. Review. No abstract available.

2.

Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for health-care decision making: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 1.

Jansen JP, Fleurence R, Devine B, Itzler R, Barrett A, Hawkins N, Lee K, Boersma C, Annemans L, Cappelleri JC.

Value Health. 2011 Jun;14(4):417-28. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.04.002.

3.

[A wide perspective on meta-analysis--may be of crucial significance for the patients].

Gøtzsche PC.

Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2000 Sep 30;120(23):2810. Norwegian. No abstract available.

4.

[Importance of a wide perspective on meta-analysis. It may be of crucial significance for the patients].

Gøtzsche PC.

Ugeskr Laeger. 2000 Oct 16;162(42):5601. Danish. No abstract available.

PMID:
11059294
5.

The need for large-scale randomized evidence without undue emphasis on small trials, meta-analyses, or subgroup analyses.

Hennekens CH, Demets D.

JAMA. 2009 Dec 2;302(21):2361-2. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1756. No abstract available.

PMID:
19952322
6.

How to use an article reporting a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis.

Mills EJ, Ioannidis JP, Thorlund K, Schünemann HJ, Puhan MA, Guyatt GH.

JAMA. 2012 Sep 26;308(12):1246-53.

PMID:
23011714
7.

Directed acyclic graphs can help understand bias in indirect and mixed treatment comparisons.

Jansen JP, Schmid CH, Salanti G.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Jul;65(7):798-807. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.01.002. Epub 2012 Apr 20.

PMID:
22521579
8.
9.

Deconstructing evidence in orthodontics: making sense of systematic reviews, randomized clinical trials, and meta-analyses.

Rinchuse DJ, Rinchuse DJ, Kandasamy S, Ackerman MB.

World J Orthod. 2008 Summer;9(2):167-76.

PMID:
18575311
10.

Subgroup analyses: when should we believe them?

Ghert M, Petrisor B.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012 Jul 18;94 Suppl 1:61-4. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00272. No abstract available.

PMID:
22810450
11.

Indirect comparisons of competing interventions.

Glenny AM, Altman DG, Song F, Sakarovitch C, Deeks JJ, D'Amico R, Bradburn M, Eastwood AJ; International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group.

Health Technol Assess. 2005 Jul;9(26):1-134, iii-iv.

12.

Systematic reviews of evaluations of prognostic variables.

Altman DG.

BMJ. 2001 Jul 28;323(7306):224-8. No abstract available.

13.

Indirect treatment comparison/network meta-analysis study questionnaire to assess relevance and credibility to inform health care decision making: an ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force report.

Jansen JP, Trikalinos T, Cappelleri JC, Daw J, Andes S, Eldessouki R, Salanti G.

Value Health. 2014 Mar;17(2):157-73. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.01.004. Erratum in: Value Health. 2016 Jan;19(1):121.

14.

Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials: the need for complete data.

Clarke MJ, Stewart LA.

J Eval Clin Pract. 1995 Nov;1(2):119-26. Review.

PMID:
9238566
15.

Evidence based medicine.

Adhikari N, Shrestha S, Ansari I.

Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ). 2006 Jul-Sep;4(3):383-9. Review. No abstract available.

PMID:
18603939
16.
17.

Adjusted indirect comparison may be less biased than direct comparison for evaluating new pharmaceutical interventions.

Song F, Harvey I, Lilford R.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 May;61(5):455-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.06.006. Epub 2007 Nov 28. Review.

PMID:
18394538
18.
19.

Large-scale randomized evidence: large, simple trials and overviews of trials.

Peto R, Collins R, Gray R.

J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 Jan;48(1):23-40. Review. No abstract available.

PMID:
7853045
20.

The role of meta-analysis in monitoring clinical trials.

Begg CB.

Stat Med. 1996 Jun 30;15(12):1299-306; discussion 1307-11. Review.

PMID:
8817803

Supplemental Content

Support Center