Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis. Группа авторов

Two‐stage IPD Meta‐Analysis to Estimate Treatment‐covariate Interactions 7.4 The One‐stage Approach 7.5 Combining IPD and non‐IPD Trials 7.6 Handling of Continuous Covariates 7.7 Handling of Categorical or Ordinal Covariates 7.8 Misconceptions and Cautions 7.9 Is My Identified Treatment‐covariate Interaction Genuine? 7.10 Reporting of Analyses of Treatment‐covariate Interactions 7.11 Can We Predict a New Patient’s Treatment Effect? 7.12 Concluding Remarks 8 One‐stage versus Two‐stage Approach to IPD Meta‐Analysis: Differences and Recommendations 8.1 Introduction 8.2 One‐stage and Two‐stage Approaches Usually Give Similar Results 8.3 Ten Key Reasons Why One‐stage and Two‐stage Approaches May Give Different Results 8.4 Recommendations and Guidance 8.5 Concluding Remarks

      11  Part II: References

      12  Part III: Critical Appraisal and Dissemination 9 Examining the Potential for Bias in IPD Meta‐Analysis Results 9.1 Introduction 9.2 Publication and Reporting Biases of Trials 9.3 Biased Availability of the IPD from Trials 9.4 Trial Quality (risk of bias) 9.5 Other Potential Biases Affecting IPD Meta‐Analysis Results 9.6 Concluding Remarks 10 Reporting and Dissemination of IPD Meta‐Analyses 10.1 Introduction 10.2 Reporting IPD Meta‐Analysis Projects in Academic Reports 10.3 Additional Means of Disseminating Findings 10.4 Concluding Remarks 11 A Tool for the Critical Appraisal of IPD Meta‐Analysis Projects (CheckMAP) 11.1 Introduction 11.2 The CheckMAP Tool 11.3 Was the IPD Meta‐Analysis Project Done within a Systematic Review Framework? 11.4 Were the IPD Meta‐Analysis Project Methods Pre‐specified in a Publicly Available Protocol? 11.5 Did the IPD Meta‐Analysis Project Have a Clear Research Question Qualified by Explicit Eligibility Criteria? 11.6 Did the IPD Meta‐Analysis Project Have a Systematic and Comprehensive Search Strategy? 11.7 Was the Approach to Data Collection Consistent and Thorough? 11.8 Were IPD Obtained from Most Eligible Trials and Their Participants? 11.9 Was the Validity of the IPD Checked for Each Trial? 11.10 Was the Risk of Bias Assessed for Each Trial and Its Associated IPD? 11.11 Were the Methods of Meta‐Analysis Appropriate? 11.12 Concluding Remarks

      13  Part III: References

      14  Part IV: Special Topics in Statistics 12 Power Calculations for Planning an IPD Meta‐Analysis 12.1 Introduction 12.2 Motivating Example: Power of a Planned IPD Meta‐Analysis of Trials of Interventions to Reduce Weight Gain in Pregnant Women 12.3 Power of an IPD Meta‐Analysis to Detect a Treatment‐covariate Interaction for a Continuous Outcome 12.4 The Contribution of Individual Trials Toward Power 12.5 The Impact of Model Assumptions on Power 12.6 Extensions 12.7 Concluding Remarks 13 Multivariate Meta‐Analysis Using IPD 13.1 Introduction 13.2 General Two‐stage Approach for Multivariate IPD Meta‐Analysis 13.3 Application to an IPD Meta‐Analysis of Anti‐hypertensive Trials 13.4 Extension to Multivariate Meta‐regression 13.5 Potential Limitations of Multivariate Meta‐Analysis 13.6 One‐stage Multivariate IPD Meta‐Analysis Applications 13.7 Special Applications of Multivariate Meta‐Analysis 13.8 Concluding Remarks 14 Network Meta‐Analysis Using IPD 14.1 Introduction 14.2 Rationale and Assumptions for Network Meta‐Analysis Скачать книгу