Comments on ‘Empirical vs natural weighting in random effects meta‐analysis’
- 19 May 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Statistics in Medicine
- Vol. 29 (12) , 1270-1271
- https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3718
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Empirical vs natural weighting in random effects meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2010
- Effect of length biased sampling of unobserved sojourn times on the survival distribution when disease is screen detectedStatistics in Medicine, 2009
- Addressing Reporting BiasesPublished by Wiley ,2008
- A Re-Evaluation of Random-Effects Meta-AnalysisJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, 2008
- Bias Modelling in Evidence SynthesisJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, 2008
- Comparison of Two Methods to Detect Publication Bias in Meta-analysisJAMA, 2006
- Identification and impact of outcome selection bias in meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2004
- On tests of the overall treatment effect in meta‐analysis with normally distributed responsesStatistics in Medicine, 2001
- What Works?: Selectivity Models and Meta-AnalysisJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, 1999