Viewpoint: taking into account risks of random errors when analysing multiple outcomes in systematic reviews
- PMID: 27030037
- PMCID: PMC10845867
- DOI: 10.1002/14651858.ED000111
Viewpoint: taking into account risks of random errors when analysing multiple outcomes in systematic reviews
References
-
- Jakobsen JC, Wetterslev J, Winkel P, Lange T, Gluud C. Thresholds for statistical and clinical significance in systematic reviews with meta‐analytic methods. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2014;14(1):120. doi.org/10.1186/1471‐2288‐14‐120 - PMC - PubMed
-
- Imberger G, Vejlby AD, Hansen SB, Møller AM, Wetterslev J. Statistical multiplicity in systematic reviews of anaesthesia interventions: a quantification and comparison between Cochrane and non‐Cochrane reviews. PLOS One 2011;6:e28422. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028422 - PMC - PubMed
-
- Jakobsen JC, Gluud C, Winkel P, Lange T, Wetterslev J. The thresholds for statistical and clinical significance – a five‐step procedure for evaluation of intervention effects in randomised clinical trials. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2014;14:34. doi.org/10.1186/1471‐2288‐14‐34 - PMC - PubMed
-
- Berlin JA, Crowe BJ, Whalen E, Xia HA, Koro CE, Kuebler J. Meta‐analysis of clinical trial safety data in a drug development program: answers to frequently asked questions. Clinical Trials 2013, 10,(1):20–31. doi.org/10.1177/1740774512465495 - PubMed
-
- Bender R, Bunce C, Clarke M, Gates S, Lange S, Pace NL, et al. Attention should be given to multiplicity issues in systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2008, 61(9):857–65. doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.03.004 - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
