David Hoaglin to Meta-Analysis as Topic
This is a "connection" page, showing publications David Hoaglin has written about Meta-Analysis as Topic.
Connection Strength
3.974
-
Chang BH, Hoaglin DC. Meta-Analysis of Odds Ratios: Current Good Practices. Med Care. 2017 04; 55(4):328-335.
Score: 0.535
-
Hoaglin DC. Shortcomings of an approximate confidence interval for moment-based estimators of the between-study variance in random-effects meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods. 2016 Dec; 7(4):459-461.
Score: 0.504
-
Hoaglin DC. Misunderstandings about Q and 'Cochran's Q test' in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2016 Feb 20; 35(4):485-95.
Score: 0.478
-
Hoaglin DC. We know less than we should about methods of meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods. 2015 Sep; 6(3):287-9.
Score: 0.472
-
Hoaglin DC. Assessment of heterogeneity in meta-analyses. JAMA. 2014 Dec 03; 312(21):2286-7.
Score: 0.455
-
Hoaglin DC, Hawkins N, Jansen JP, Scott DA, Itzler R, Cappelleri JC, Boersma C, Thompson D, Larholt KM, Diaz M, Barrett A. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 2. Value Health. 2011 Jun; 14(4):429-37.
Score: 0.357
-
Bakbergenuly I, Hoaglin DC, Kulinskaya E. Methods for estimating between-study variance and overall effect in meta-analysis of odds ratios. Res Synth Methods. 2020 May; 11(3):426-442.
Score: 0.165
-
Bakbergenuly I, Hoaglin DC, Kulinskaya E. Estimation in meta-analyses of mean difference and standardized mean difference. Stat Med. 2020 01 30; 39(2):171-191.
Score: 0.160
-
Bakbergenuly I, Hoaglin DC, Kulinskaya E. Pitfalls of using the risk ratio in meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods. 2019 Sep; 10(3):398-419.
Score: 0.154
-
Pradhan R, Hoaglin DC, Cornell M, Liu W, Wang V, Yu H. Automatic extraction of quantitative data from ClinicalTrials.gov to conduct meta-analyses. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 01; 105:92-100.
Score: 0.148
-
Berkey CS, Anderson JJ, Hoaglin DC. Multiple-outcome meta-analysis of clinical trials. Stat Med. 1996 Mar 15; 15(5):537-57.
Score: 0.124
-
Trikalinos TA, Hoaglin DC, Small KM, Terrin N, Schmid CH. Methods for the joint meta-analysis of multiple tests. Res Synth Methods. 2014 Dec; 5(4):294-312.
Score: 0.109
-
Trikalinos TA, Hoaglin DC, Schmid CH. An empirical comparison of univariate and multivariate meta-analyses for categorical outcomes. Stat Med. 2014 Apr 30; 33(9):1441-59.
Score: 0.106
-
Hoaglin DC. A brief introduction to influence diagnostics in regression. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1991; 7(2):227-34.
Score: 0.087
-
Berkey CS, Hoaglin DC, Antczak-Bouckoms A, Mosteller F, Colditz GA. Meta-analysis of multiple outcomes by regression with random effects. Stat Med. 1998 Nov 30; 17(22):2537-50.
Score: 0.038
-
Emerson JD, Hoaglin DC, Mosteller F. Simple robust procedures for combining risk differences in sets of 2 x 2 tables. Stat Med. 1996 Jul 30; 15(14):1465-88.
Score: 0.032
-
Berkey CS, Hoaglin DC, Mosteller F, Colditz GA. A random-effects regression model for meta-analysis. Stat Med. 1995 Feb 28; 14(4):395-411.
Score: 0.029
-
Emerson JD, Burdick E, Hoaglin DC, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. An empirical study of the possible relation of treatment differences to quality scores in controlled randomized clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1990 Oct; 11(5):339-52.
Score: 0.021