J. Jakobsen

Statistics and Probability · 2014–2021

A researcher in the Science corpus: 4 papers; trusts 9 researchers and is trusted by 0 researchers here, as inferred from the citation graph.

Subfields

Whom J. Jakobsen trusts overall

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

  1. Julian P. T. Higgins
  2. John P. A. Ioannidis
  3. G. Guyatt
  4. J. Wetterslev
  5. Hervé Abdi
  6. K. Thorlund
  7. J. Sterne
  8. James R. Carpenter
  9. K. F. Schulz
  10. S. Thompson

Who trusts J. Jakobsen overall

  1. C. Gluud

Papers from J. Jakobsen's perspective

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

  1. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study (British medical journal)
  2. The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: a large survey (Canadian Medical Association Journal)
  3. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. (Journal of Clinical Epidemiology)
  4. The Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random effects meta-analysis is straightforward and considerably outperforms the standard DerSimonian-Laird method (BMC Medical Research Methodology)
  5. Contour-enhanced meta-analysis funnel plots help distinguish publication bias from other causes of asymmetry. (Journal of Clinical Epidemiology)
  6. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. (Health Technology Assessment)
  7. Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: potential and pitfalls (British medical journal)
  8. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis (Statistics in Medicine)
  9. Predicting the extent of heterogeneity in meta-analysis, using empirical data from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (International Journal of Epidemiology)
  10. Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: a critical appraisal of guidelines and practice (Journal of Health Services Research and Policy)

Their papers