These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
7. Importance of trends in the interpretation of an overall odds ratio in the meta-analysis of clinical trials. Senn S Stat Med; 1994 Feb; 13(3):293-6. PubMed ID: 8202653 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. HELOW: a program for testing extreme homogeneity in meta-analysis. Zintzaras E; Ioannidis JP Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2014 Nov; 117(2):383-6. PubMed ID: 25023534 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Statistical Models and Methods for Network Meta-Analysis. Madden LV; Piepho HP; Paul PA Phytopathology; 2016 Aug; 106(8):792-806. PubMed ID: 27111798 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Accounting for heterogeneity in meta-analysis using a multiplicative model-an empirical study. Mawdsley D; Higgins JP; Sutton AJ; Abrams KR Res Synth Methods; 2017 Mar; 8(1):43-52. PubMed ID: 27259973 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comment on: Heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be expected and appropriately quantified. Coory MD Int J Epidemiol; 2010 Jun; 39(3):932; author reply 933. PubMed ID: 19349478 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Sparse meta-analysis with high-dimensional data. He Q; Zhang HH; Avery CL; Lin DY Biostatistics; 2016 Apr; 17(2):205-20. PubMed ID: 26395907 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Bivariate random effects meta-analysis of ROC curves. Arends LR; Hamza TH; van Houwelingen JC; Heijenbrok-Kal MH; Hunink MG; Stijnen T Med Decis Making; 2008; 28(5):621-38. PubMed ID: 18591542 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Some recommended statistical analytic practices when reliability generalization studies are conducted. Sánchez-Meca J; López-López JA; López-Pina JA Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2013 Nov; 66(3):402-25. PubMed ID: 23046285 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Re: "A critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods". Olkin I Am J Epidemiol; 1994 Aug; 140(3):297-9; discussion 300-1. PubMed ID: 8048979 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Commentary: Heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be expected and appropriately quantified. Higgins JP Int J Epidemiol; 2008 Oct; 37(5):1158-60. PubMed ID: 18832388 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparison of methods for fixed effects meta-analysis of individual patient data with time to event outcomes. Tudur Smith C; Williamson PR Clin Trials; 2007; 4(6):621-30. PubMed ID: 18042571 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. On pooled and stratified analysis of epidemiologic rates. Nurminen M Public Health Rev; 1988; 16(3-4):163-87. PubMed ID: 3272013 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The likelihood ratio versus the p value in meta-analysis: where is the evidence? Comment on the paper by S. N. Goodman. Zucker D; Yusuf S Control Clin Trials; 1989 Jun; 10(2):205-8; discussion 209-10. PubMed ID: 2666027 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]