414 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27714841)
1. Random effects meta-analysis: Coverage performance of 95% confidence and prediction intervals following REML estimation.
Partlett C; Riley RD
Stat Med; 2017 Jan; 36(2):301-317. PubMed ID: 27714841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman approach and its modification for random-effects meta-analysis with few studies.
Röver C; Knapp G; Friede T
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2015 Nov; 15():99. PubMed ID: 26573817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Bayesian estimation in random effects meta-analysis using a non-informative prior.
Bodnar O; Link A; Arendacká B; Possolo A; Elster C
Stat Med; 2017 Jan; 36(2):378-399. PubMed ID: 27790722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A new justification of the Hartung-Knapp method for random-effects meta-analysis based on weighted least squares regression.
van Aert RCM; Jackson D
Res Synth Methods; 2019 Dec; 10(4):515-527. PubMed ID: 31111673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluating the performance of Bayesian and restricted maximum likelihood estimation for stepped wedge cluster randomized trials with a small number of clusters.
Grantham KL; Kasza J; Heritier S; Carlin JB; Forbes AB
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Apr; 22(1):112. PubMed ID: 35418034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Hartung-Knapp method is not always conservative compared with fixed-effect meta-analysis.
Wiksten A; Rücker G; Schwarzer G
Stat Med; 2016 Jul; 35(15):2503-15. PubMed ID: 26842654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Individual participant data meta-analysis of continuous outcomes: A comparison of approaches for specifying and estimating one-stage models.
Legha A; Riley RD; Ensor J; Snell KIE; Morris TP; Burke DL
Stat Med; 2018 Dec; 37(29):4404-4420. PubMed ID: 30101507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Transforming the Model T: random effects meta-analysis with stable weights.
Malloy MJ; Prendergast LA; Staudte RG
Stat Med; 2013 May; 32(11):1842-64. PubMed ID: 23097338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Kenward-Roger-type corrections for inference methods of network meta-analysis and meta-regression.
Noma H; Hamura Y; Gosho M; Furukawa TA
Res Synth Methods; 2023 Sep; 14(5):731-741. PubMed ID: 37399845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Meta-analysis of few small studies in orphan diseases.
Friede T; Röver C; Wandel S; Neuenschwander B
Res Synth Methods; 2017 Mar; 8(1):79-91. PubMed ID: 27362487
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Jointly pooling aggregated effect sizes and their standard errors from studies with continuous clinical outcomes.
Almalik O; Zhan Z; Heuvel ERVD
Biom J; 2022 Oct; 64(7):1340-1360. PubMed ID: 35754152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Meta-analysis of two studies in the presence of heterogeneity with applications in rare diseases.
Friede T; Röver C; Wandel S; Neuenschwander B
Biom J; 2017 Jul; 59(4):658-671. PubMed ID: 27754556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Multivariate meta-analysis: a robust approach based on the theory of U-statistic.
Ma Y; Mazumdar M
Stat Med; 2011 Oct; 30(24):2911-29. PubMed ID: 21830230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
