186 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19131013)
1. Synthesis of observational studies should consider credibility ceilings.
Salanti G; Ioannidis JP
J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Feb; 62(2):115-22. PubMed ID: 19131013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effect of formal statistical significance on the credibility of observational associations.
Ioannidis JP
Am J Epidemiol; 2008 Aug; 168(4):374-83; discussion 384-90. PubMed ID: 18611956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Application of credibility ceilings probes the robustness of meta-analyses of biomarkers and cancer risk.
Papatheodorou SI; Tsilidis KK; Evangelou E; Ioannidis JP
J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Feb; 68(2):163-74. PubMed ID: 25433443
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Selective reporting of adjusted estimates in observational epidemiology studies: reasons and implications for meta-analyses.
Peters J; Mengersen K
Eval Health Prof; 2008 Dec; 31(4):370-89. PubMed ID: 19000980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of underlying risk as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analyses: a simulation study of Bayesian and frequentist implementations of three models.
Dohoo I; Stryhn H; Sanchez J
Prev Vet Med; 2007 Sep; 81(1-3):38-55. PubMed ID: 17477995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.
Manchikanti L; Datta S; Smith HS; Hirsch JA
Pain Physician; 2009; 12(5):819-50. PubMed ID: 19787009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Meta-analysis in occupational epidemiology: a review of practice.
McElvenny DM; Armstrong BG; Järup L; Higgins JP
Occup Med (Lond); 2004 Aug; 54(5):336-44. PubMed ID: 15289591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Statistically significant meta-analyses of clinical trials have modest credibility and inflated effects.
Pereira TV; Ioannidis JP
J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Oct; 64(10):1060-9. PubMed ID: 21454050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Trial sequential analysis reveals insufficient information size and potentially false positive results in many meta-analyses.
Brok J; Thorlund K; Gluud C; Wetterslev J
J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Aug; 61(8):763-9. PubMed ID: 18411040
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Interpretation of tests of heterogeneity and bias in meta-analysis.
Ioannidis JP
J Eval Clin Pract; 2008 Oct; 14(5):951-7. PubMed ID: 19018930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Statistical methods for assessing the influence of study characteristics on treatment effects in 'meta-epidemiological' research.
Sterne JA; Jüni P; Schulz KF; Altman DG; Bartlett C; Egger M
Stat Med; 2002 Jun; 21(11):1513-24. PubMed ID: 12111917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Practice of systematic reviews. VII. Pooling of results from observational studies].
Zeegers MP; Heisterkamp SH; Kostense PJ; van der Windt DA; Scholten RJ
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Jul; 144(29):1393-7. PubMed ID: 10923147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Meta-analysis of repeated measures study designs.
Peters JL; Mengersen KL
J Eval Clin Pract; 2008 Oct; 14(5):941-50. PubMed ID: 19018929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Controversy and debate on credibility ceilings. Paper 1: Fundamental problems with the "credibility ceiling" method for meta-analyses.
Mathur MB; VanderWeele TJ
J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Nov; 127():208-210. PubMed ID: 32450128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Meta-analysis and causal inference: a case study of benzene and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
Weed DL
Ann Epidemiol; 2010 May; 20(5):347-55. PubMed ID: 20382335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of excess statistical significance in meta-analyses of 98 biomarker associations with cancer risk.
Tsilidis KK; Papatheodorou SI; Evangelou E; Ioannidis JP
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2012 Dec; 104(24):1867-78. PubMed ID: 23090067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Estimating the proportion of studies missing for meta-analysis due to publication bias.
Formann AK
Contemp Clin Trials; 2008 Sep; 29(5):732-9. PubMed ID: 18586577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Interpreting epidemiological evidence: how meta-analysis and causal inference methods are related.
Weed DL
Int J Epidemiol; 2000 Jun; 29(3):387-90. PubMed ID: 10869307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. An exploratory test for an excess of significant findings.
Ioannidis JP; Trikalinos TA
Clin Trials; 2007; 4(3):245-53. PubMed ID: 17715249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Performance of the trim and fill method in the presence of publication bias and between-study heterogeneity.
Peters JL; Sutton AJ; Jones DR; Abrams KR; Rushton L
Stat Med; 2007 Nov; 26(25):4544-62. PubMed ID: 17476644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
