SZodixStudyAcademic Library
DashboardShelvesOpen accessMy libraryInboxNotesWriteLearnAlerts
More
Ask your libraryNotificationsQuick citeReview
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
NICE DSU Technical Support Document 7: Evidence Synthesis of Treatment Efficacy in Decision Making: A Reviewer’s Checklist
16 references·5 citing·38 second hop
NICE DSU Technical Support Document 7: Evidence Synthesis of Treatment Efficacy in Decision Making: A Reviewer’s Checklist (2012)NICE DSU Technical Support Document 7: Ev…Interpreting Indirect Treatment Comparisons and Network Meta-Analysis for Health-Care Decision Making: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: Part 1 (2011)Interpreting Indirect Treatme…The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews (2010)The impact of outcome reporti…Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial (2010)Graphical methods and numeric…Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for…Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study (2008)Empirical evidence of bias in…Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies (2008)Assessing Risk of Bias in Inc…A Re-Evaluation of Random-Effects Meta-Analysis (2008)A Re-Evaluation of Random-Eff…Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2007)Development of AMSTAR: a meas…Decision Modelling For Health Economic Evaluation (2006)Decision Modelling For Health…What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta‐analysis of sparse data (2004)What to add to nothing? Use a…Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (2003)Measuring inconsistency in me…Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses (2001)Reported Methodologic Quality…Methods for Meta-Analysis in Medical Research (2000)Methods for Meta-Analysis in …Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? (1998)Does quality of reports of ra…Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Empirical evidence of bias. D…Methods for Trend Estimation from Summarized Dose-Response Data, with Applications to Meta-Analysis (1992)Methods for Trend Estimation …Methodologies for network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials in pain, anaesthesia, and perioperative medicine: a narrative review (2025)Methodologies for network met…Methodological review of NMA bias concepts provides groundwork for the development of a list of concepts for potential inclusion in a new risk of bias tool for network meta-analysis (RoB NMA Tool) (2024)Methodological review of NMA …The development of network meta-analysis (2022)The development of network me…What Guidance Are Researchers Given on How to Present Network Meta-Analyses to End-Users such as Policymakers and Clinicians? A Systematic Review (2014)What Guidance Are Researchers…A checklist for critical appraisal of indirect comparisons (2014)A checklist for critical appr…The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies (2008)Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews: a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool: methodological research (2010)GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence—indirectness (2011)Meta-analysis in clinical trials (1986)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis (2002)Chapter 9: Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta-Analyses (2008)Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses (2011)Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses (2019)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. (1998)Summarizing systematic reviews (2015)Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS) (2016)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)The Combination of Estimates from Different Experiments (1954)Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis (2001)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation (2015)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials (2001)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials (2001)Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies (2007)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care (2010)GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) (2011)Graphical Tools for Network Meta-Analysis in STATA (2013)Ranking treatments in frequentist network meta-analysis works without resampling methods (2015)The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations (2015)Model Parameter Estimation and Uncertainty Analysis (2012)Model Parameter Estimation and Uncertainty: A Report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-6 (2012)Modeling Good Research Practices—Overview: A Report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-1 (2012)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement83,813 cited
  • 2003Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses63,086 cited
  • 1995Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials5,560 cited
  • 2007Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews4,376 cited
  • 2010Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial3,764 cited
  • 1998Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?3,560 cited
  • 2008Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies3,395 cited
  • 2006Decision Modelling For Health Economic Evaluation3,144 cited
  • 2008A Re-Evaluation of Random-Effects Meta-Analysis2,562 cited
  • 2008Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study2,534 cited
  • 1992Methods for Trend Estimation from Summarized Dose-Response Data, with Applications to Meta-Analysis2,352 cited
  • 2001Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses2,285 cited
  • 2000Methods for Meta-Analysis in Medical Research1,795 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

2004
What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta‐analysis of sparse data
1,731 cited
  • 2010The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews1,133 cited
  • 2011Interpreting Indirect Treatment Comparisons and Network Meta-Analysis for Health-Care Decision Making: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: Part 11,036 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2022The development of network meta-analysis27 cited
    • 2014A checklist for critical appraisal of indirect comparisons20 cited
    • 2024Methodological review of NMA bias concepts provides groundwork for the development of a list of concepts for potential inclusion in a new risk of bias tool for network meta-analysis (RoB NMA Tool)18 cited
    • 2014What Guidance Are Researchers Given on How to Present Network Meta-Analyses to End-Users such as Policymakers and Clinicians? A Systematic Review16 cited
    • 2025Methodologies for network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials in pain, anaesthesia, and perioperative medicine: a narrative review14 cited