Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 22

1.

Simulation evaluation of statistical properties of methods for indirect and mixed treatment comparisons.

Song F, Clark A, Bachmann MO, Maas J.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Sep 12;12:138. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-138.

2.

Findings of Bayesian Mixed Treatment Comparison Meta-Analyses: Comparison and Exploration Using Real-World Trial Data and Simulation [Internet].

Jonas DE, Wilkins TM, Bangdiwala S, Bann CM, Morgan LC, Thaler KJ, Amick HR, Gartlehner G.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2013 Feb.

3.

Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives.

Brookes ST, Whitley E, Peters TJ, Mulheran PA, Egger M, Davey Smith G.

Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(33):1-56. Review.

4.

Bayesian meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons: an introduction to mixed treatment comparisons.

Jansen JP, Crawford B, Bergman G, Stam W.

Value Health. 2008 Sep-Oct;11(5):956-64. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00347.x. Epub 2008 May 16. Review.

5.

Methods to decrease blood loss during liver resection: a network meta-analysis.

Moggia E, Rouse B, Simillis C, Li T, Vaughan J, Davidson BR, Gurusamy KS.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 31;10:CD010683. Review.

PMID:
27797116
6.

Indirect comparisons of treatments based on systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials.

Edwards SJ, Clarke MJ, Wordsworth S, Borrill J.

Int J Clin Pract. 2009 Jun;63(6):841-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02072.x. Review.

PMID:
19490195
7.

Use of Mixed Treatment Comparisons in Systematic Reviews [Internet].

Coleman CI, Phung OJ, Cappelleri JC, Baker WL, Kluger J, White CM, Sobieraj DM.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2012 Aug.

8.

A Bayesian Missing Data Framework for Multiple Continuous Outcome Mixed Treatment Comparisons [Internet].

Hong H, Carlin BP, Chu H, Shamliyan TA, Wang S, Kane RL.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2013 Jan.

9.

Review of mixed treatment comparisons in published systematic reviews shows marked increase since 2009.

Lee AW.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Feb;67(2):138-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.07.014. Epub 2013 Oct 3. Review.

PMID:
24090930
10.

Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomised controlled trials: combined analysis of meta-epidemiological studies.

Savović J, Jones H, Altman D, Harris R, Jűni P, Pildal J, Als-Nielsen B, Balk E, Gluud C, Gluud L, Ioannidis J, Schulz K, Beynon R, Welton N, Wood L, Moher D, Deeks J, Sterne J.

Health Technol Assess. 2012 Sep;16(35):1-82. Review.

11.

Evaluation of networks of randomized trials.

Salanti G, Higgins JP, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP.

Stat Methods Med Res. 2008 Jun;17(3):279-301. Epub 2007 Oct 9. Review.

PMID:
17925316
12.

The placebo effect in thyroid cancer: a meta-analysis.

Llavero-Valero M, Guillén-Grima F, Zafon C, Galofré JC.

Eur J Endocrinol. 2016 Apr;174(4):465-72. doi: 10.1530/EJE-15-1119. Epub 2016 Jan 13. Review.

13.

Management of frozen shoulder: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Maund E, Craig D, Suekarran S, Neilson A, Wright K, Brealey S, Dennis L, Goodchild L, Hanchard N, Rangan A, Richardson G, Robertson J, McDaid C.

Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(11):1-264. doi: 10.3310/hta16110. Review.

14.

Psychological therapies for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults: a network meta-analysis.

Pompoli A, Furukawa TA, Imai H, Tajika A, Efthimiou O, Salanti G.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 13;4:CD011004. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011004.pub2. Review.

15.

Pharmacological treatments for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: can mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis be useful?

Virgili G, Novielli N, Menchini F, Murro V, Giacomelli G.

Curr Drug Targets. 2011 Feb;12(2):212-20. Review.

PMID:
20887240
16.

A systematic review and economic evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of aldosterone antagonists for postmyocardial infarction heart failure.

McKenna C, Burch J, Suekarran S, Walker S, Bakhai A, Witte K, Harden M, Wright K, Woolacott N, Lorgelly P, Fenwick L, Palmer S.

Health Technol Assess. 2010 May;14(24):1-162. doi: 10.3310/hta14240. Review.

17.

What is the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using drugs in treating obese patients in primary care? A systematic review.

Ara R, Blake L, Gray L, Hernández M, Crowther M, Dunkley A, Warren F, Jackson R, Rees A, Stevenson M, Abrams K, Cooper N, Davies M, Khunti K, Sutton A.

Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(5):iii-xiv, 1-195. doi: 10.3310/hta16050. Review.

18.

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
19.

TNF-alpha inhibitors for ankylosing spondylitis.

Maxwell LJ, Zochling J, Boonen A, Singh JA, Veras MM, Tanjong Ghogomu E, Benkhalti Jandu M, Tugwell P, Wells GA.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 18;(4):CD005468. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005468.pub2. Review.

PMID:
25887212
20.

Use of indirect and mixed treatment comparisons for technology assessment.

Sutton A, Ades AE, Cooper N, Abrams K.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(9):753-67. Review.

PMID:
18767896

Supplemental Content

Support Center