207 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26053175)
1. An empirical comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in 12 894 meta-analyses.
Langan D; Higgins JP; Simmonds M
Res Synth Methods; 2015 Jun; 6(2):195-205. PubMed ID: 26053175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in simulated random-effects meta-analyses.
Langan D; Higgins JPT; Jackson D; Bowden J; Veroniki AA; Kontopantelis E; Viechtbauer W; Simmonds M
Res Synth Methods; 2019 Mar; 10(1):83-98. PubMed ID: 30067315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A comparison of 20 heterogeneity variance estimators in statistical synthesis of results from studies: a simulation study.
Petropoulou M; Mavridis D
Stat Med; 2017 Nov; 36(27):4266-4280. PubMed ID: 28815652
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Methods for estimating between-study variance and overall effect in meta-analysis of odds ratios.
Bakbergenuly I; Hoaglin DC; Kulinskaya E
Res Synth Methods; 2020 May; 11(3):426-442. PubMed ID: 32112619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparative performance of heterogeneity variance estimators in meta-analysis: a review of simulation studies.
Langan D; Higgins JPT; Simmonds M
Res Synth Methods; 2017 Jun; 8(2):181-198. PubMed ID: 27060925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Do statistical heterogeneity methods impact the results of meta- analyses? A meta epidemiological study.
Mheissen S; Khan H; Normando D; Vaiid N; Flores-Mir C
PLoS One; 2024; 19(3):e0298526. PubMed ID: 38502662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Multistep estimators of the between-study variance: The relationship with the Paule-Mandel estimator.
van Aert RCM; Jackson D
Stat Med; 2018 Jul; 37(17):2616-2629. PubMed ID: 29700839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random effects meta-analysis is straightforward and considerably outperforms the standard DerSimonian-Laird method.
IntHout J; Ioannidis JP; Borm GF
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2014 Feb; 14():25. PubMed ID: 24548571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Methods to estimate the between-study variance and its uncertainty in meta-analysis.
Veroniki AA; Jackson D; Viechtbauer W; Bender R; Bowden J; Knapp G; Kuss O; Higgins JP; Langan D; Salanti G
Res Synth Methods; 2016 Mar; 7(1):55-79. PubMed ID: 26332144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparison of methods for meta-analysis of a small number of studies with binary outcomes.
Mathes T; Kuss O
Res Synth Methods; 2018 Sep; 9(3):366-381. PubMed ID: 29573180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Interval estimation of the overall treatment effect in random-effects meta-analyses: Recommendations from a simulation study comparing frequentist, Bayesian, and bootstrap methods.
Weber F; Knapp G; Glass Ä; Kundt G; Ickstadt K
Res Synth Methods; 2021 May; 12(3):291-315. PubMed ID: 33264488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Different meta-analysis methods can change judgements about imprecision of effect estimates: a meta-epidemiological study.
Wang Z; Alzuabi MA; Morgan RL; Mustafa RA; Falck-Ytter Y; Dahm P; Sultan S; Murad MH
BMJ Evid Based Med; 2023 Apr; 28(2):126-132. PubMed ID: 36732029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A note on the empirical Bayes heterogeneity variance estimator in meta-analysis.
Sidik K; Jonkman JN
Stat Med; 2019 Sep; 38(20):3804-3816. PubMed ID: 31209917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of statistical inferences from the DerSimonian-Laird and alternative random-effects model meta-analyses - an empirical assessment of 920 Cochrane primary outcome meta-analyses.
Thorlund K; Wetterslev J; Awad T; Thabane L; Gluud C
Res Synth Methods; 2011 Dec; 2(4):238-53. PubMed ID: 26061888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Heterogeneity estimates in a biased world.
Hönekopp J; Linden AH
PLoS One; 2022; 17(2):e0262809. PubMed ID: 35113897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Paule-Mandel estimators for network meta-analysis with random inconsistency effects.
Jackson D; Veroniki AA; Law M; Tricco AC; Baker R
Res Synth Methods; 2017 Dec; 8(4):416-434. PubMed ID: 28585257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Likelihood-based random-effects meta-analysis with few studies: empirical and simulation studies.
Seide SE; Röver C; Friede T
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Jan; 19(1):16. PubMed ID: 30634920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparisons of various estimates of the
Wang Y; DelRocco N; Lin L
Stat Methods Med Res; 2024 May; 33(5):745-764. PubMed ID: 38502022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Estimation in meta-analyses of mean difference and standardized mean difference.
Bakbergenuly I; Hoaglin DC; Kulinskaya E
Stat Med; 2020 Jan; 39(2):171-191. PubMed ID: 31709582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. On the Q statistic with constant weights for standardized mean difference.
Bakbergenuly I; Hoaglin DC; Kulinskaya E
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2022 Nov; 75(3):444-465. PubMed ID: 35094381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
