To IPD or not to IPD?

By L. Stewart, J. Tierney. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 2002

587 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3abb63fa1778dd09baa1de5cb69bd7eca7405fab

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

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Enhanced secondary analysis of survival data: reconstructing the data from published Kaplan-Meier survival curves (2012, background): “One reason for this is that it allows a more informative analysis of time-dependent data [15].”
Predicting nursing home admission in the U.S: a meta-analysis (2007, methodology): “The next step in testing such a tool is to apply it to individual patient data [20,43] across nationally representative”
Get real in individual participant data (IPD) meta‐analysis: a review of the methodology (2015, background): “, 1998), to standardize definitions and analyses (van Walraven, 2010; Lyman and Kuderer, 2005), to obtain complete follow-up data on all randomized participants (Clarke and Stewart, 1994), to combine studies with different follow-up times (Sud and Douketis, 2009; Lyman and Kuderer, 2005; Stewart and”
The state of the science in the meta-analysis of single-case experimental designs (2008, methodology): “This is an extension of what some meta-analysts are doing in medical research, using what they call an IPD (individual patient data) model (e.g. Stewart & Tierney, 2002).”
Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting (2010, result): “The one step and two step individual participant data meta-analyses gave identical results. The pooled treatment effect was estimated at -10.16 (95% CI -12.27 to -8.06), indicating that hypertension treatment reduced systolic blood pressure by, on average, 10.16 mm Hg compared with controls. There w”