Random effects meta‐analysis of event outcome in the framework of the generalized linear mixed model with applications in sparse data
By Theo Stijnen, Taye H. Hamza, Pınar Özdemir. Statistics in Medicine, 2010
696 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Statistics and Probability
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/23b9abecf4e67a37257f18df914e91a181a81829
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Economics and Econometrics
- Georgia Salanti
- Ian R. White
- Julian P. T. Higgins
- Johannes B Reitsma
- Karel G. M. Moons
- T. Debray
- W. Viechtbauer
- Dan Jackson
In Statistics and Probability
- Georgia Salanti
- Ian R. White
- Julian P. T. Higgins
- Dan Jackson
- A. Chaimani
- W. Viechtbauer
- Johannes B Reitsma
- J. Barrett
Citations in the corpus
- Methods to estimate the between‐study variance and its uncertainty in meta‐analysis† (2015, methodology): “…and instead either use the FE model and the Mantel–Haenszel method for unbalanced group sizes or Peto’s method for balanced group sizes (Bradburn et al., 2007; Sweeting et al., 2004), or to switch to models/methods based on exact distributional assumptions (Kuss, 2014; Stijnen et al., 2010).”
- Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression (2012, methodology): “In the case of binary outcomes, zero counts in observed treatment arms require additional treatment; the standard procedure is to add 1/2 to all cells in observed treatment arms for any trial with a zero count (Sweeting et al., 2004).”
- Get real in individual participant data (IPD) meta‐analysis: a review of the methodology (2015, methodology): “…heterogeneity, and correlation between random effects when few studies or few participants (or events) per study are available (Debray et al., 2013; Stijnen et al., 2010; Tobías et al., 2004), when statistical models cannot fully account for follow-up times (Poppe et al., 2011; Lyman and Kuderer,…”
- Meta‐analysis using individual participant data: one‐stage and two‐stage approaches, and why they may differ (2016, neutral): “and that their variances (Var θ ̂i Þ are known [3,11,56,57].”
- netmeta: An R Package for Network Meta-Analysis Using Frequentist Methods (2023, neutral): “The NCH-NMA model was proposed by Stijnen, Hamza, and Ozdemir (2010).”