C. Boersma

Statistics and Probability · 2011

A researcher in the Science corpus: 2 papers; trusts 3 researchers and is trusted by 1 researcher here, as inferred from the citation graph.

Subfields

Whom C. Boersma trusts

Their strongest outbound trust, strongest first, inferred from their citations.

  1. Thomas Lumley (in Statistics and Probability)
  2. A. Ades (in Statistics and Probability)
  3. Guobing Lu (in Statistics and Probability)

Who trusts C. Boersma

  1. Georgia Salanti (in Statistics and Probability)

Papers from C. Boersma's perspective

Ordered by how strongly the researchers C. Boersma trusts endorse each paper. Same corpus, a different order for every researcher.

  1. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses (British medical journal)
  2. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit
  3. Advanced methods in meta‐analysis: multivariate approach and meta‐regression (Statistics in Medicine)
  4. Indirect comparisons of competing interventions. (Health Technology Assessment)
  5. How vague is vague? A simulation study of the impact of the use of vague prior distributions in MCMC using WinBUGS
  6. Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence (British medical journal)
  7. Network meta‐analysis for indirect treatment comparisons (Statistics in Medicine)
  8. Assessing Evidence Inconsistency in Mixed Treatment Comparisons
  9. Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta‐analysis (Statistics in Medicine)
  10. 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. (Value in Health)

Their papers