Mortality Review Group

Statistics and Probability · 2010

A researcher in the Science corpus: 1 paper; trusts 2 researchers and is trusted by 0 researchers here, as inferred from the citation graph.

Subfields

Whom Mortality Review Group trusts overall

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

  1. Julian P. T. Higgins

Papers from Mortality Review Group's perspective

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

  1. Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta‐regression (Statistics in Medicine)
  2. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis (Statistics in Medicine)
  3. Commentary: Heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be expected and appropriately quantified. (International Journal of Epidemiology)
  4. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses (British medical journal)
  5. Hand‐Grip Dynamometry Predicts Future Outcomes in Aging Adults (Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy)
  6. Research Agenda for Frailty in Older Adults: Toward a Better Understanding of Physiology and Etiology: Summary from the American Geriatrics Society/National Institute on Aging Research Conference on… (Journal of The American Geriatrics Society)
  7. Frailty: an emerging research and clinical paradigm--issues and controversies. (The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences)
  8. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. (Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA))
  9. Reasons or excuses for avoiding meta-analysis in forest plots (British medical journal)
  10. How vague is vague? A simulation study of the impact of the use of vague prior distributions in MCMC using WinBUGS

Their papers