A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomised and non-randomised studies

A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomised and non-randomised studies.

MacLehose
Reeves
Harvey
Sheldon
Russell
Black

January 2000

BACKGROUND: There is controversy about the value of evidence about the effectiveness of healthcare i...

Exploiting information in random effects meta-analysis

Higgins, J.P.

January 1997

Available from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:DXN014806 / BLDSC - British Library Docume...

Methodological quality and bias in randomised controlled trials

Schulz, K.F.

January 1994

Available from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:DX193867 / BLDSC - British Library Documen...

Choosing between randomised and non-randomised studies A systematic review

Black, N.
McKee, M.
Britton, A.
National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment, Southampton (United Kingdom)

January 1998

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:4275.2242(2/13) / BLDSC - British Lib...

Systematic review of trials and other studies

Sutton, A.
Abrams, K.
Jones, D.
National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment, Southampton (United Kingdom)

January 1999

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:4275.2242(Vol.2 no.19) / BLDSC - Brit...

Multiple comparisons emphasizing incremental effects

Richmond, J
Essex Univ., Colchester (United Kingdom). Dept. of Economics

January 1984

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:3597.973(242) / BLDSC - British Libr...

Summary effect sizes for matched Cochrane and non-Cochrane paired meta-analyses.

Johanna Useem (837460)
Alana Brennan (347904)
Michael LaValley (837461)
Michelle Vickery (837462)
Omid Ameli (837463)
Nichole Reinen (837464)
Christopher J. Gill (325231)

December 2015

<p>The figure presents Forest plots of effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals for each pair of C...

Systematic reviews What have they got to offer evidence based policy and practice?

Boaz, A.
Ashby, D.
Young, K.
ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, London (United Kingdom)

January 2002

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:9349.2272(no 2) / BLDSC - British Lib...

Interpreting evidence from multiple randomised and non-randomised studies

Smith, T.C.

January 1995

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:D063542 / BLDSC - British Library Doc...

Comparing Effect Sizes of Independent Studies

Rosenthal, Robert
Rubin, Donald B.

January 2014

This article presents a general set of procedures for comparing the effect sizes of two or more inde...

Systematic differences between the Cochrane and non-Cochrane matched meta-analyses, in terms of a) natural log of effect size, and b) standard error of effect size.

Johanna Useem (837460)
Alana Brennan (347904)
Michael LaValley (837461)
Michelle Vickery (837462)
Omid Ameli (837463)
Nichole Reinen (837464)
Christopher J. Gill (325231)

December 2015

<p>This figure regresses on a natural log scale pairs of Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews in terms ...

Systematic review of interventions in the treatment and prevention of obesity

Glenny, A.
O'Meara, S.
York Univ. (United Kingdom). NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination

January 1997

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:3487.1275(10) / BLDSC - British Libra...

The effectiveness of treatment for drug users An international systematic review of the evidence

Simoens, S.
Matheson, C.
Inkster, K. (and others)
Scottish Executive, Edinburgh (United Kingdom). Effective Interventions Unit

January 2002

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:m02/33991 / BLDSC - British Library D...

Description and effect sizes of studies in the systematic review and meta-analysis.

Edie L. Sperling (17101946)
Jennifer M. Hulett (17101949)
LeeAnne B. Sherwin (17101952)
Sarah Thompson (10516821)
B. Ann Bettencourt (10516306)

October 2023

Description and effect sizes of studies in the systematic review and meta-analysis.</p

Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials Implications for the conduct of meta-analyses

Moher, D.
Cook, D.
Jadad, A.
National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment, Southampton (United Kingdom)

January 1999

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:4275.2242(3/12) / BLDSC - British Lib...

A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomised and non-randomised studies.

MacLehose
Reeves
Harvey
Sheldon
Russell
Black

January 2000

BACKGROUND: There is controversy about the value of evidence about the effectiveness of healthcare i...

Exploiting information in random effects meta-analysis

Higgins, J.P.

January 1997

Available from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:DXN014806 / BLDSC - British Library Docume...

Methodological quality and bias in randomised controlled trials

Schulz, K.F.

January 1994

Available from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:DX193867 / BLDSC - British Library Documen...

Choosing between randomised and non-randomised studies A systematic review

Black, N.
McKee, M.
Britton, A.
National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment, Southampton (United Kingdom)

January 1998

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:4275.2242(2/13) / BLDSC - British Lib...

Systematic review of trials and other studies

Sutton, A.
Abrams, K.
Jones, D.
National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment, Southampton (United Kingdom)

January 1999

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:4275.2242(Vol.2 no.19) / BLDSC - Brit...

Multiple comparisons emphasizing incremental effects

Richmond, J
Essex Univ., Colchester (United Kingdom). Dept. of Economics

January 1984

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:3597.973(242) / BLDSC - British Libr...

Summary effect sizes for matched Cochrane and non-Cochrane paired meta-analyses.

Johanna Useem (837460)
Alana Brennan (347904)
Michael LaValley (837461)
Michelle Vickery (837462)
Omid Ameli (837463)
Nichole Reinen (837464)
Christopher J. Gill (325231)

December 2015

<p>The figure presents Forest plots of effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals for each pair of C...

Systematic reviews What have they got to offer evidence based policy and practice?

Boaz, A.
Ashby, D.
Young, K.
ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, London (United Kingdom)

January 2002

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:9349.2272(no 2) / BLDSC - British Lib...

Interpreting evidence from multiple randomised and non-randomised studies

Smith, T.C.

January 1995

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:D063542 / BLDSC - British Library Doc...

Comparing Effect Sizes of Independent Studies

Rosenthal, Robert
Rubin, Donald B.

January 2014

This article presents a general set of procedures for comparing the effect sizes of two or more inde...

Systematic differences between the Cochrane and non-Cochrane matched meta-analyses, in terms of a) natural log of effect size, and b) standard error of effect size.

Johanna Useem (837460)
Alana Brennan (347904)
Michael LaValley (837461)
Michelle Vickery (837462)
Omid Ameli (837463)
Nichole Reinen (837464)
Christopher J. Gill (325231)

December 2015

<p>This figure regresses on a natural log scale pairs of Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews in terms ...

Systematic review of interventions in the treatment and prevention of obesity

Glenny, A.
O'Meara, S.
York Univ. (United Kingdom). NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination

January 1997

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:3487.1275(10) / BLDSC - British Libra...

The effectiveness of treatment for drug users An international systematic review of the evidence

Simoens, S.
Matheson, C.
Inkster, K. (and others)
Scottish Executive, Edinburgh (United Kingdom). Effective Interventions Unit

January 2002

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:m02/33991 / BLDSC - British Library D...

Description and effect sizes of studies in the systematic review and meta-analysis.

Edie L. Sperling (17101946)
Jennifer M. Hulett (17101949)
LeeAnne B. Sherwin (17101952)
Sarah Thompson (10516821)
B. Ann Bettencourt (10516306)

October 2023

Description and effect sizes of studies in the systematic review and meta-analysis.</p

Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials Implications for the conduct of meta-analyses

Moher, D.
Cook, D.
Jadad, A.
National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment, Southampton (United Kingdom)

January 1999

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:4275.2242(3/12) / BLDSC - British Lib...

A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomised and non-randomised studies.

MacLehose
Reeves
Harvey
Sheldon
Russell
Black

January 2000

BACKGROUND: There is controversy about the value of evidence about the effectiveness of healthcare i...

Exploiting information in random effects meta-analysis

Higgins, J.P.

January 1997

Available from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:DXN014806 / BLDSC - British Library Docume...

Methodological quality and bias in randomised controlled trials

Schulz, K.F.

January 1994

Available from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:DX193867 / BLDSC - British Library Documen...

A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomised and non-randomised studies

Abstract

Extracted data

A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomised and non-randomised studies

Abstract

Extracted data

Related items

Related items