Publication Date
In 2025 | 0 |
Since 2024 | 0 |
Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 2 |
Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 5 |
Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 6 |
Descriptor
Randomized Controlled Trials | 6 |
Statistical Bias | 6 |
Meta Analysis | 5 |
Intervention | 4 |
Bayesian Statistics | 3 |
Comparative Analysis | 3 |
Evidence | 3 |
Medical Research | 3 |
Risk | 3 |
Epidemiology | 2 |
Literature Reviews | 2 |
More ▼ |
Source
Research Synthesis Methods | 6 |
Author
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 6 |
Reports - Research | 5 |
Information Analyses | 3 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Yao, Minghong; Wang, Yuning; Ren, Yan; Jia, Yulong; Zou, Kang; Li, Ling; Sun, Xin – Research Synthesis Methods, 2023
Rare events meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often underpowered because the outcomes are infrequent. Real-world evidence (RWE) from non-randomized studies may provide valuable complementary evidence about the effects of rare events, and there is growing interest in including such evidence in the decision-making process.…
Descriptors: Evidence, Meta Analysis, Randomized Controlled Trials, Decision Making
Nejstgaard, Camilla Hansen; Lundh, Andreas; Abdi, Suhayb; Clayton, Gemma; Gelle, Mustafe Hassan Adan; Laursen, David Ruben Teindl; Olorisade, Babatunde Kazeem; Savovic, Jelena; Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn – Research Synthesis Methods, 2022
Randomised trials are often funded by commercial companies and methodological studies support a widely held suspicion that commercial funding may influence trial results and conclusions. However, these studies often have a risk of confounding and reporting bias. The risk of confounding is markedly reduced in meta-epidemiological studies that…
Descriptors: Medical Research, Randomized Controlled Trials, Corporations, Financial Support
Moustgaard, Helene; Jones, Hayley E.; Savovic, Jelena; Clayton, Gemma L.; Sterne, Jonathan AC; Higgins, Julian PT; Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn – Research Synthesis Methods, 2020
Randomized clinical trials underpin evidence-based clinical practice, but flaws in their conduct may lead to biased estimates of intervention effects and hence invalid treatment recommendations. The main approach to the empirical study of bias is to collate a number of meta-analyses and, within each, compare the results of trials with and without…
Descriptors: Epidemiology, Evidence, Medical Research, Intervention
Kim, Mi-Ok; Wang, Xia; Liu, Chunyan; Dorris, Kathleen; Fouladi, Maryam; Song, Seongho – Research Synthesis Methods, 2017
Phase I trials aim to establish appropriate clinical and statistical parameters to guide future clinical trials. With individual trials typically underpowered, systematic reviews and meta-analysis are desired to assess the totality of evidence. A high percentage of zero or missing outcomes often complicate such efforts. We use a systematic review…
Descriptors: Meta Analysis, Synthesis, Literature Reviews, Pediatrics
Corbett, Mark Stephen; Moe-Byrne, Thirimon; Oddie, Sam; McGuire, William – Research Synthesis Methods, 2016
Background: Quasi-randomization might expedite recruitment into trials in emergency care settings but may also introduce selection bias. Methods: We searched the Cochrane Library and other databases for systematic reviews of interventions in emergency medicine or urgent care settings. We assessed selection bias (baseline imbalances) in prognostic…
Descriptors: Quasiexperimental Design, Randomized Controlled Trials, Medical Services, Medicine
Verde, Pablo E.; Ohmann, Christian – Research Synthesis Methods, 2015
Researchers may have multiple motivations for combining disparate pieces of evidence in a meta-analysis, such as generalizing experimental results or increasing the power to detect an effect that a single study is not able to detect. However, while in meta-analysis, the main question may be simple, the structure of evidence available to answer it…
Descriptors: Randomized Controlled Trials, Bayesian Statistics, Comparative Analysis, Evidence